Previewpdf

Global Citizenship Education
and Teacher Education
Global Citizenship Education and Teacher Education brings together scholars and
practitioners from all continents to explore the role of teacher education in
formulating a practice of citizenship that has a global scope and is guided by
critical and emancipatory approaches.
By considering educational responses to global challenges—such as global
warming, rising levels of inequalities, intensification of armed conflicts, growing
streams of international migration, and the impact of neoliberal policies—
this book provides valuable analyses for researchers, teacher educators, and
educators. The volume examines historical and conceptual issues relating to
the incorporation of global citizenship education in teacher education, and
presents examples from across the world that showcase main trends in research
and practice from across the world.
This book is of great interest to graduate and postgraduate students,
researchers, and libraries in the fields of citizenship education, global education,
teacher education, international and comparative education, and education
policy and politics.
Daniel Schugurensky is Professor of Justice and Social Inquiry and Director

of the Social Pedagogy Program at Arizona State University, USA.
Charl Wolhuter is Comparative and International Education Professor at

North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, South Africa.
Global Citizenship Education
and Teacher Education
Theoretical and Practical Issues
Edited by Daniel Schugurensky

and Charl Wolhuter
First published 2020
by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2020 Taylor & Francis
The right of Daniel Schugurensky & Charl Wolhuter to be identified as
the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual
chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record for this title has been requested
ISBN: 978-0-815-35548-9 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-351-12984-8 (ebk)
Typeset in Baskerville
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
Contents
List of Contributors viii

Preface xvi
C AR LO S A L BERTO TO RRES
Teachers’ Education and Global Citizenship

Education: An Introduction 1
DAN I E L S C H U G U RENSKY AND C HARL WO LH UTER
1 Different Views on Global Citizenship Education:

Making Global Citizenship Education More Critical,
Political and Justice-Oriented 20
W I E L V E UGELERS
2 Critical Global Citizenship Education in Canada,

England, and the United States: Interrogating
(In)justice and Self-reflexivity in Teacher Education
Programs 40
J E N N I F E R K . BERG EN, SHARO N A. C O O K, AND LORNA M c LEA N
3 The Struggle for ‘Thick’ or Transformative

Citizenship: A Global Perspective on Educators’
Views on Democracy and Citizenship 56
DAV I D Z Y N GIER
4 Citizenship Education Beyond the Nation State:

Implications for Teacher Education 85
S E UN GHO MO O N AND C HARLES TO C C I
5 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education:

Is There Any Alternative Beyond Redemptive Dreams
and Nightmarish Germs? 102
GUS TAVO E . FISC HMAN AND MARTA EST ELLÉS
vi Contents
6 UNESCO ASPnet Schools, Global Citizenship
Education, and Conviviality as a Tool to Live
Together on a Shared Planet 125
LY N E T T E S HU LT Z AND MAREN ELFERT
7 Global Citizenship Education and Teacher Education

in Africa 139
S AM S O N M A EKELE T SEG AY AND MC JERRY ATTA BEKOE
8 Global Citizenship Education in East, South,

and Southeast Asia 161
M I C H AE L GOH AND MEG AN C . D EU T SC HMAN
9 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education

in Asia: A Case Study From Vietnam 179
HOA T RUO N G -W HIT E AND T HI NHAT HO

in Spain and Portugal 201
AL FR E D O GOMES D IAS, ANTO NIO ERNESTO GÓM EZ
RO D R I GUE Z , ANTO NI SANT IST EBAN, AND JOA N PAGÈS BLA NCH
11 Exploring Global Citizenship in Teacher Education

Across Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Austria,
Czech Republic, Ireland and Italy 215
M A S S I M I L I A NO TARO Z Z I
12 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education

in Canada and the US: Trends, Barriers,
and Possibilities 233
K AR E N PA S HBY AND LAU RA C . ENG EL
13 Teacher Education and Global Citizenship Education

in Latin America: The Cases of Argentina, Brazil,
Chile and Colombia 250
GUS TAVO A . G O NZ ÁLEZ -VALENC IA, MIG U EL A NGEL JA RA ,
S I XT I NA P I N OC HET PINO C HET, LÉIA AD RIANA DA S ILVA S A NTIAGO
AN D J OAN PAG ÈS BLANC H
Contents vii
in Oceania 264
N I R A N JAN C ASINAD ER
Index 285
Contributors
Mcjerry Atta Bekoe has a PhD in educational leadership and policy from
Beijing Normal University and a master of ublic policy from Peking Univer-
sity. He is the former director of research and elections for the New Patriotic
Party in the Akuapem North Constituency in Ghana and currently serves as
Director of Communication for the same political party. Dr. Bekoe has an
interest in public policy and in educational policy. He is the co-author of the
article “Barriers and challenges of educational development in China: an
analysis on rural-urban migrant residents.”
Jennifer K. Bergen is a PhD candidate at the University of Ottawa, and

teaches social studies methods courses in the Bachelor of Education pro-
gram at the University of Saskatchewan. Her work in social and environ-
mental justice youth engagement led her to study youth civic education and
representations of civic identities in curricula. Her current research focuses
on the intersections of anti-racist, social justice, and civic education in set-
tler colonial contexts. Specifically, she interrogates the ways that bachelor
of education programs in Canada are engaging white teacher candidates in
developing anti-racist civic engagement pedagogy.
Niranjan Casinader is Senior Lecturer (Curriculum and Assessment) in the

Faculty of Education, Monash University, Australia. A geographer by train-
ing, his research and teaching are built on his experience of over 30 years
of teaching and leadership in Victorian schools as well as other educational
programs. His research and publications focus on the relationships between
education, culture, thinking, development, and globalization, both contem-
porary and historical. Currently his work centers on the impact of global-
ization on the expectations and realities of teacher expertise, especially in
relation to cultural education and inquiry teaching. In 2016, he received the
Australian Council for Educational Leaders State Fellowship for his contri-
butions to education.
Sharon A. Cook is Distinguished University Professor and Professor Emerita

at the University of Ottawa. Her research interests are in peace and global
and civic education, women and evangelicalism, the history of women’s
Contributors ix
health, the pedagogy of history and the history of education in Canada.
Her latest books are A history of the faculty of education, University of Ottawa,
1875–2015 (Ottawa: Baico Publishing, 2018) and Sex, lies and cigarettes: Cana-
dian women, smoking and visual culture, 1880–2008 (Montreal and Kingston,
McGill-Queens University Press, 2012).
Megan C. Deutschman is a PhD candidate in the Comparative and Inter-
national Development Education program at the University of Minnesota.
As a former elementary educator, Megan is passionate about equity in edu-
cation. Her research focuses on systemic racism in education, specifically
the ways in which whiteness is enacted by teachers and how that enactment
can uphold or dismantle racism. While working on her PhD, Megan men-
tors and teaches pre-service elementary educators at the university. In the
future, Megan plans to continue her work with pre-service teachers and to
continue her research on racism and whiteness in education.
Alfredo Gomes Dias holds a bachelor degree in history and a doctorate in
human geography from the University of Lisbon (2012) and a doctorate in
education at the University of Barcelona (2019). He is a researcher at the
Institute of Geography and Spatial Planning at the University of Lisbon
and Adjunct Professor at the Politechnic Institution of Higher Education in
Lisbon. He coordinates the social sciences scientific area, and is Professor
of Social Science in Teacher Education Programs. He was the coordinator
of the project University Curriculum of Global Citizenship Education and
Networks of Intervention. From 2013 to 2019, he was a researcher at Syner-
gies Education Development.
Maren Elfert is Lecturer in Education and Society in the School of Edu-
cation, Communication and Society at King’s College London (UK). She
also holds a National Academy of Education/Spencer Postdoctoral Fellow-
ship. She obtained a PhD from the University of British Columbia, Canada.
Before pursuing doctoral studies, she worked for more than a decade as a
member of the professional staff at the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong
Learning. Her research focuses on how international organizations contrib-
ute to the globalization of educational ideas and policies. She is the author
of UNESCO’s utopia of lifelong learning: An intellectual history, published by Rout-
ledge in 2018.
Laura C. Engel is Associate Professor of International Education and Inter-
national Affairs, Director of the International Education Program, and
co-chair of the GW UNESCO Chair in International Education for Devel-
opment at George Washington University. Her interests focus on global
education policy trends in federal systems, including education policy uses
of international large-scale assessments, and internationalization of educa-
tion. She authored over 50 articles, book chapters, and policy briefs. Her
latest book is The machinery of school: internationalization in action (Routledge,
2019). Dr. Engel serves on the board of directors of the NEA Foundation
x Contributors
and is joint editor of International Studies in Sociology of Education. Dr. Engel
earned her PhD in education policy from the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
Marta Estellés is Assistant Professor in the Department of Education at the
University of Cantabria, Spain. Her research interests include citizenship
education, social studies education, curriculum policies, and teacher edu-
cation. She has published on democratic citizenship education and initial
teacher education. She is currently working on a research project related to
teachers’ political views and behaviors and their attitudes towards including
controversial issues in the classroom. She is part of the Fedicaria collec-
tive, which advocates for critical social studies education. Her publications
include Evidence of curricular standardization: Environment pedagogy in the Chilean
and Spanish official curricula in primary education (2013), Lo que no vemos sobre la
educación ciudadana en la formación del profesorado: supuestos y sobreentendidos (2015),
and Teacher education for citizenship in a globalized world: A case study in Spain (2017).
Gustavo E. Fischman is Professor of Educational Policy and Comparative
Education at the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State Uni-
versity. His work focuses on understanding and improving the processes of
knowledge-production and exchange between scholars, educators, activists,
practitioners, administrators, media workers, policymakers, and the broader
public. Dr. Fischman has authored more than 150 academic publications.
He was a visiting scholar in several graduate programs in Europe and Latin
America and received many awards and appointments. He is the editor of
Education Review, consulting editor of Education Policy Analysis Archives, and
a co-editor of the 2018 and 2020 Review of Research in Education (AERA).
Among his books are Imagining teachers: Rethinking teacher education and gender,
Dumb ideas won’t create smart kids and Made in Latin America: Open access, scholarly
journals, and regional innovations.
Michael Goh is a full professor in the Department of Organizational Lead-
ership, Policy, and Development, and an affiliated faculty in counseling
and student personnel psychology at the Interdisciplinary Center for the
Study of Global Change, at the University of Minnesota, USA. Dr. Goh
also serves as vice-president for equity and diversity for the University of
Minnesota’s five-campus system and previously as associate vice-provost
and director of the Institute for Diversity, Equity, and Advocacy. Dr. Goh is
an interdisciplinary scholar and educator who applies an interculturalist or
culturally intelligent framework on the science and practice of multicultural
and international counseling psychology, teacher education, and diversity
and inclusion work in higher education.
Antonio Ernesto Gómez Rodríguez (deceased 2019) was a professor of
social studies education at the University of Malaga. He was also the Head
of the Andalucia Education Council (Spain) and Sponsor of CIVES Foun-
dation. He was a representative of the social studies professors in Spain, and
Contributors xi
the founder of the Social and Citizenship Education Research Group. His
work is relevant for social studies teaching and particularly for the teach-
ing of citizenship education. He conducted several comparative studies in
Europe in the fields of social studies education and citizenship education.
Gustavo A. González-Valencia holds a PhD in social science education
from the Autonomous University of Barcelona (Spain) where he works as
Serra Hunter lecturer at the Faculty of Education. He is a member of Grup
de Recerca en Didàctica de les Ciències Socials (GREDICS). His research
interests are citizenship and democratic education, social studies educa-
tion, initial teacher training and research methodology. His recent projects
are Ready to Teach Global Citizenship? and Teaching and Learning to
Interpret Contemporary Problems and Conflicts: How do social sciences
contribute to the formation of a critical global citizenship? His latest pub-
lications are Heritage education and global citizenship education, Global citizenship
education in Latin America and participation in citizenship education courses: A study on
the social representations of teachers. He was a member of the group of experts
that developed the last curricular proposal for social studies education in
Colombia.
Thi Nhat Ho is a lecturer at the Faculty of Psychology and Education, Hanoi
National University of Education in Viet Nam. She obtained her PhD from
Queensland University of Technology in Australia. Her research focuses on
educational assessment, effective teaching and learning, teaching for cre-
ativity, comparative education, and teacher education programs for the 21st
century. Among her recent publications are Developing assessment criteria of a
lesson for creativity to promote teaching for creativity and The development of critical
thinking for students in Vietnamese schools: From policies to practices.
Miguel Angel Jara is a history teacher, educational research specialist, and
holds a master’s degree in teaching social studies research. He has a PhD
in teaching social studies (Autonomous University of Barcelona). He is
Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Humanities and the Faculty of Educa-
tion in National University of Comahue. He is a researcher in various proj-
ects about teaching and learning and teacher training in social studies. He is
a principal investigator of “social studies learning in digital culture context”.
He is an active member of Association of Professors of Teaching of History
of the National Universities (APEHUN).
Lorna R. McLean is a full professor in the Faculty of Education at the Uni-
versity of Ottawa in Ontario, Canada. She is the Director of the Research
Unit ‘Making History’ and participates in the project ‘Developing a Global
Perspective for Educators’. She is a member of the Faculty of Graduate and
Postdoctoral Studies and teaches courses in the society, culture and literacies
concentration. Her research interests include the history of citizenship and
education, and pedagogical approaches to teaching social studies, global cit-
izenship and environmental education. Her publications include Conceptual
xii Contributors
clarity and connections: Global education and teacher candidates (2009), Expecting the
exceptional: Pre-service professional development in global citizenship education (2011)
and Rethinking global citizenship resources for new teachers: Promoting critical thinking
and equity (2016).
Seungho Moon is an associate professor in curriculum studies at Loyola
University Chicago (LUC). He received his EdD in curriculum studies
from Teachers College, Columbia University (2011). His research and
passion center on releasing the social imagination for promoting equity
and justice in education by interrogating interdisciplinary knowledge in
curriculum studies, community-university-school partnerships, and trans-
national theories. He has published more than 30 peer reviewed journal
articles, book reviews, and books. Representative books are The curricu-
lum foundations reader (Co-authored with Ryan and Tocci, 2020) and Three
approaches to qualitative research through the ARtS: Narratives of teaching for social
justice and community (2019). He was the recipient of an early career award
from the Critical Issues in Curriculum and Cultural Studies (CICCS)
Special interest Group at the American Educational Research Associa-
tion (AERA) in 2017.
Joan Pagès Blanch is Emeritus Professor of Social Sciences Teaching at
the Autonomous University of Barcelona. He holds a bachelor of phi-
losophy and letters (modern and contemporary history) and a doctorate
in education sciences. He specializes in the curriculum of social sciences
and education for citizenship in teacher training. He is the author of more
than four hundred publications including books, chapters of books and
articles, and has supervised 40 doctoral theses. He was Dean of Faculty
of Education and Head of Department of Teaching Language, Litera-
ture and Social Sciences Education. He was a founder and coordinator
of Research Group in Teaching Social Studies Group (GREDICS). His
research interests are social studies teaching, citizenship education and
teacher training.
Karen Pashby is Reader of Education Studies at Manchester Metropoli-
tan University. She teaches undergraduates and postgraduates and is a core
member of the Education and Social Research Institute and co-lead of the
Education and Global Futures Research Group. She is Adjunct Professor
in the Department of Educational Policy Studies at University of Alberta
and Docent in the Faculty of Educational Sciences at University of Hel-
sinki. A former secondary educator (in Canada and Brazil) and experienced
teacher educator, her research draws on postcolonial and decolonial theo-
retical resources to examine productive pedagogical tensions in education
for global citizenship in multicultural contexts. She is a widely published
contributor to research on global citizenship education, and her participa-
tory research with secondary educators received funding from the British
Academy and Swedish Research Council. She is an active participant in
multi-stakeholder networks supporting global learning in Europe such as
the Bridge 47 and ANGEL networks.
Contributors xiii
Sixtina Pinochet Pinochet has a PhD in teaching history, geography and
social studies (Autonomous University of Barcelona). She is Professor at
The Metropolitan University of Educational Sciences (Chile). She is an
academic member of the School of Education at Catholic University of
the North (Chile) and a member of Interdisciplinary Research Observa-
tory of Citizenship Education. Her research interests are citizenship and
democratic education, social studies education, initial teacher training and
invisible actors in history teaching.
Antoni Santisteban is a professor at the Faculty of Educational Sciences of
the Autonomous University of Barcelona. He is the Head of the Depart-
ment of Language, Literature and Social Science Education, and has coor-
dinated the master’s and doctoral programs in social science didactics. He
has published over 200 articles, book chapters and books. He is a member
of scientific committees of national and international journals and Princi-
pal Researcher of GREDICS, a research group recognized by the Catalan
Agency for University Quality. He currently coordinates a research project
on the contribution of social sciences to the development of a critical global
citizenship. He was President of the University Association of Social Sci-
ence Teaching Staff, which organizes the annual International Symposium
on Social Science Teaching.
Daniel Schugurensky is a professor at Arizona State University, with a
joint appointment in the School of Public Affairs and the School of Social
Transformation. His areas of interest include citizenship education, civic
engagement, and participatory democracy. He is the director of the gradu-
ate program in social and cultural pedagogy, and the Participatory Gov-
ernance Initiative. Among his recent publications are Sustainable development
and ecopedagogy (2019), Participatory budgeting, civic education, and political capi-
tal (2019), Social pedagogy and social education: connecting traditions and innovation
(2018) and ‘By the People’: Participatory democracy, civic engagement and citizenship
education (2017).
Lynette Shultz is Professor and Director of the Centre for Global Citizenship
Education and Research at the University of Alberta, Canada as well as
co-editor of the Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education. She has published
widely on the topics of education policy, democracy, social justice, and
global citizenship with a particular focus on the geo-politics of knowledge.
Among her publications are Engaging the multiple discourses of global citizenship
education within a Canadian university: Deliberation, contestation, and social justice pos-
sibilities; Global citizenship education in post-secondary institutions: theories, practices,
policies; Global citizenship education and the role of the academy: a critical introduction;
Decolonizing social justice education: from policy knowledge to citizenship action; and
What do we ask of global citizenship education?
Léia Adriana da Silva Santiago is a professor at the Federal Institute of
Science and Technology Goiano, Brazil, where she coordinates the masters
in professional and technological education. Her areas of research interest
xiv Contributors
are history of education, curriculum, textbooks, Latin American public
policy, and ethnic issues. Dr. da Silva graduated in history from the Federal
University of Santa Catarina and has a master in education from the same
institution. She obtained her PhD in education from the Federal University
of Paraná, with a postdoctoral fellowship at the Autonomous University of
Barcelona, Spain.
Massimiliano Tarozzi is Co-Director of the IOE- Development Education
Research Centre. He is also full Professor of Global Citizenship Education
and General Education at the University of Bologna (where he gained his
original PhD). At the same university he is founding director of the Inter-
national Research Centre on Global Citizenship Education. He has been
studying in the field of intercultural education for more than 20 years, and
has extensively published on the topics of global citizenship education,
intercultural education, citizenship education, social justice education, and
qualitative research methods. In 2016, he co-authored (with C.A. Torres),
Global citizenship education and the crises of multiculturalism.
Charles Tocci is an assistant professor of education in the School of Edu-
cation at Loyola University Chicago. His work explores the connections
between American education and democracy in the past and in the present.
He is currently focused on the ways that teaching practice changes in inten-
tional, responsive, and sustained ways. His current research interests include
history and civics education, changes to teacher practices, and education
history archives. He is the Associate Editor for Review of Research in Education,
a flagship journal published by the American Educational Research Associ-
ation, and co-author of the Curriculum foundations read (2020). Other publica-
tions include Teaching, learning, and leading: Preparing teachers as educational policy
actors, Wild and small and realizing mutual benefits through partnering on teaching and
learning: Loyola, Senn High School, and the International Baccalaureate.
Hoa Truong-White is a PhD candidate with the Faculty of Education,
University of Ottawa, Canada. Her previous research focused on youth
civic engagement and teacher candidates’ civic identities. Currently, her
research engages issues of critical global citizenship education and partici-
patory visual and digital research with youth. She holds a scholarship from
the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council: Canada Graduate
Scholarship to Honour Nelson Mandela.
Samson Maekele Tsegay has a doctoral degree in educational leadership
and policy (comparative education) from the Faculty of Education, Bei-
jing Normal University. He is the author of many articles in peer-reviewed
journals. Dr. Tsegay has also served as a reviewer and editorial member
of different journals. He is currently a PhD scholar and visiting lecturer at
the School of Education, University of Roehampton. His research interests
focus on globalization, migration, and higher education.
Contributors xv
Wiel Veugelers is Professor of Education at the University for Humanistic
Studies in Utrecht (the Netherlands). He coordinated the Erasmus+ stra-
tegic partnership ‘Education for Democratic Intercultural Citizenship’ and
the research project ‘Teaching Common Values’ on education for democ-
racy and tolerance in the European Union. He has been chair of the AERA
SIG Moral Development and Education and of the EARLI SIG Moral and
Democratic Education. He has published over 80 articles in international
academic journals and six books in English. He is Editor and Founder of
the book series ‘Moral Development and Citizenship Education’, Associate
Editor of the Journal of Moral Education, and a member of the international
program advisory board of the IEA study on citizenship education (ICCS).
In 2012, he received the Maslowaty Award of EARLI for his book Educa-
tion and humanism and the Association of Moral Education the Kuhmerker
Career Award in 2015 for his contribution to research on moral and citizen-
ship education.
Charl Wolhuter is Professor of Comparative and International Education
at the Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University, South Africa.
He has a doctorate in comparative education from the University of Stel-
lenbosch, South Africa, and held visiting professorships in several countries,
including Canada, the Netherlands, Greece, United Kingdom, Finland,
Australia, Italy, Slovakia, Ukraine, China; Namibia, Hong Kong, and Ger-
many. He is the author of several books and many articles on history of
education and comparative education. Among his recent publications are
An examination of the potential of cultural-historical activity theory for explaining transi-
tions in national education systems, Thirty years since the fall of the Berlin wall: Educa-
tional reforms worldwide, Comparative and international education: Survey of an infinite
field and Teacher education in a post-1989 world: A comparison between Lithuania and
South Africa–global isomorphism, regional hegemony/homogeny, or resilient local context?
David Zyngier is Associate Professor at Southern Cross University, Australia
after 17 years at Monash University. A former teacher and school principal,
he has written extensively on student engagement, social justice, democracy
and education and pedagogies that enhance achievement for all students
but in particular those from communities of disadvantage. He works within
a critical and post-structural orientation to pedagogy that is distinguishable
by its commitment to social justice and by investigating how school educa-
tion can improve student outcomes for all. His research covers interrelated
areas focusing on teacher pedagogies and beliefs and how they impact on
children’s learning and achievement from disadvantaged and marginalized
communities. He is Fellow of the Australian Council of Education leaders
and a recipient of an Australian Research Council Discovery Award. He
has established the Public Education Network in Australia and is a frequent
commentator on education issues in the Australian media.
Preface
Teachers’ Bildung and Global
Citizenship Education in an Era
of Uncertainty and Instability
Carlos Alberto Torres
In his speech at the World Economic Forum Annual meeting in Davos, Switzer-
land, in January 2020, the United Nations Secretary General António Manuel
de Oliveira Guterres defined the world in two words: Uncertainty and Instabil-
ity.1 This is the world in which teachers, who for many scholars are considered
the first line of defense of rationality, democracy and peace, live, enter their
classrooms daily, teach, conduct research, and shall believe in their own profes-
sion as one that may be able to change this global and local conditions. Teach-
ers’ training and teachers values are central to the survival of the human species.
The main aim of this volume was to put together an international collection
of essays on global citizenship education and teacher education that reflected
theoretical debates, research findings and emerging practices from around the
world. In doing so, the editors had two purposes: theory and research (Chap-
ters 1–6) and landscapes of practice (Chapters 7–14).
As editors Schugurensky and Wolhuter claim “it is encouraging that U.N.
member countries have made a formal commitment to help achieve the SDGs,
and that over 85 percent report including human rights and fundamental free-
doms in education policy. However, gaps between discourses and practices are
not infrequent (p. 4).”
Including GCE in the formal national curriculum has been a central respon-
sibility of many institutions associated with UNESCO such as the APCEIU
and the Mahatma Gandhi Institute.2 The meta-theory (Morrow & Torres,
1995, pp. 19–25) and the emerging movement of the global commons was
developed by many programs in the United Nations system, and in our work
at the Paulo Freire Institute-UCLA and the UNESCO Chair in Global Learn-
ing and Global Citizenship Education (2015–2020) (Torres, 2017). It is also
reflected in the Global Commons Review.3 This meta-theory and movement
defines as its core concern equality in the human condition. From this premise,
it should be important to focus on teachers as potential global public demo-
cratic intellectuals in action as one of the prerequisites to confront the perils of
our time. (Torres & Van Heertum, 2009, pp. 221–240; Torres & Van Heertum,
2020)
As Daniel Schugurensky and Charl Wolhuter argue, “a key agenda of global
citizenship education is to go beyond notions of national citizenship and sup-
port humanity’s struggle for the three Ps of the ‘global commons’: ‘planet,
Preface xvii
peace and people’” (Bosio & Torres, 2019). To put it in UNESCO language,
in the teaching of global citizenship education “it is essential to avoid narra-
tives that glorify violence and militarism, and instead promote models of peace
and reconciliation, inviting students to question received knowledge” (Unesco,
2018, p. 210). Moreover, UNESCO’s discourse on GCED emphasizes the need
to nurture respect and solidarity in learners in order to build a sense of belong-
ing to a common humanity and help them become responsible and active
global citizens in building inclusive, just and peaceful societies. (p. 6)”
This comprehensive book offers several vistas on teachers and teacher
training education institutions in the global north and the global south. One
question that can be raised is how teaching the global commons, and devel-
oping a social movement about the global commons, including the concepts
of global citizenship education and education for sustainable development,
may create a new bildung in teacher professional development, identity and
practice; a bildung that rescues the concept of democracy from the critique of
its ungovernability, or notions such ‘illiberal democracy’ or post-democracy
models as the solution, and sets the tone for a model of dialogical or delibera-
tive democracy.
A model of deliberative democracy is based on a new ‘social pedagogical
contract’ both in our classrooms, lifelong learning programs, and society more
generally, with the support of the ethical and legal framework of human rights.
We should add the contribution of the work of Paulo Freire as part of the tra-
dition of critical modernism, as we have defended in our work with Raymond
Morrow: “This epistemological, theoretical and political Aufheben was able to
recognize and celebrate the presence of diverse emancipatory experiences in
the social struggles of Europe and in the Western world, emerging as what we
called critical modernism” (Torres, 2019, pp. 5–6).
A central premise of this book is that teachers properly educated are able
and apt actors who can reinforce GCE and democratic behavior, beliefs,
goals and values in practical, analytical, moral and institutional terms. We
need new teachers moving from technocratic and instrumental rationality
to communicational rationality. Putting it differently, the construction of
democracy requires the importance of dialogue in the educational paideia.
Paulo Freire spoke many times about dialogue as the essence of democracy.
Scholars discussing alternative conceptions of democracy should follow this
lead. Using C. B. Macpherson, Bruce Ackerman, and John Rawls as exemples,
Constitutionalist Philosopher Carlos Santiago Nino, tells us that
The moral qualities of dialogue or deliberation account for yet another

conception of democracy relying on the transformation of people’s
preferences. Despite many versions of this general outlook, all rely
on dialogue as a means of containing selfish interest and the power
of factions based on them. This constraint is achieved by dialogue’s
tendency to exclude those positions which cannot be sustained on an
impartial basis.
(Nino, 1996, p. 101)
xviii Preface
Nino attempted to substantiate the foundations of deliberative democracy in an
epistemological constructivism, positioning himself between Rawls and Haber-
mas. For Nino, “democracy is the most reliable procedure for obtaining access
to the knowledge of moral principles” (Nino, 1996, p. 107). In line with Freire,
for dialogue to prevail requires that key values be sustained, defended, and prac-
tically implemented. We may ask: are teachers up to the task? What are the pre-
dominant values and views of teachers—beyond their areas of expertise and
competence—regarding democratic governance and behavior?
The three core concepts of global citizenship education are cognitive,
affective and behavioral traits.4 Traditionally, the metrics for measuring cogni-
tive training, considering the technocratic nature of most modern education,
have predominated.5 However, how to ‘measure’ the affective and behavioral
traits embedded in Global Citizenship Education (GCE)? This work is not only
about measurement, but we need to link the work on these three core concepts
of GCE, connecting them to the global commons meta-theory and movement,
and to the constitution of global public democratic intellectuals interacting
with teachers and teachers training education institutions experimenting a
silent revolution of Global Citizenship Education.6
OCDE or World Bank policy documents as well as recurrent UNESCO
recommendations emphasize the demand to equip teachers to meet diverse
learning needs. Several chapters in this timely book examine how various
inputs from the teacher education continuum enhance teachers’ self-efficacy
relative to their work with pupils with different cultural backgrounds and learn-
ing needs and to promote—and how—an ethos of social cohesion, citizenship
and solidarity in schools.
Most countries around the world are increasingly aware of the need to pro-
vide tailored teacher education programs to support these education needs,
and each offers a model unique to its national or local context. A broader aim
of teachers training is to understand how specific institutional mechanisms as
well as teachers’ beliefs and attitudes may promote equity and social cohesion
and inclusion in schooling and teaching. Much has been written about the
relevance of the context in comparative education including in the area of
GCE and social inclusion in schools. However, very few studies provide a more
specific investigation of the influence of policy contexts in value terms.
Though GCE and democratic behavior, beliefs, goals and values in educa-
tion are widely debated in the literature, little is known about the policies pro-
moting them through the education of the educators, and even less about how
teachers make sense of these policies in educational settings, comparatively. In
the US or China, for instance, it has been shown that educating for citizenship
and inclusive education may be supported but also hindered by resources, poli-
cies, discourses and institutional arrangements.
The politics of inclusion require the commitment of teachers and school
staff to integrate in situ principles in the curriculum, in teaching and assess-
ment. What is the uniqueness of the context and teachers’ characteristics
which are key to understanding teacher learning? Teacher preparation is a
major ingredient to build teachers’ lenses and conceptions, and this insight is
Preface xix
particularly relevant for empowering teachers to strive for the inclusion of all
learners and the promotion of democratic values within the classroom. This
book offers a comparative perspective because scholarship among countries is
uneven. While in some countries there is a more consolidated research tradi-
tion investigating teacher preparation and its contribution to citizenship edu-
cation and democratic values, in others, such scholarship and equipment are
rather limited or inexistent.
Studies on citizenship education that include teachers’ voices and learning
are still largely absent from the literature, such as studies on teachers’ beliefs
about their own students’ ability to learn and engage in learning. We still have
important research questions unanswered.7
a) How teaching for citizenship and social justice is shaped and influenced by
educational and social policies locally, nationally and globally?
b) How to understand individual teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward citi-
zenship, equity and inclusion in schooling and teaching in the context of
each country but also comparatively?
c) What are the constraints and resources for teachers to build a democratic
project?
d) How organizations both in higher education and schooling systems empower
or de-skill teachers to meet diverse learning needs?
e) Which institutional and governance arrangements best support teach-
ers’ beliefs of fair inclusion, and which lessons may be derived by policy
makers?
f) How Global Citizenship Education and education for sustainable devel-
opment (ESD) can be included in the regular curriculum as generative
themes that unify the whole curriculum rather than create ‘watertight
compartments’ in curriculum and instruction?
The chapters in this book, written by authors from every corner of the world
with a deep commitment, expertise and knowledge of teachers training in the
area of global citizenship education offer a cornucopia of insights, theoretical
responses and empirical evidence, making this book a most relevant contribu-
tion to global citizenship education in teacher’s education.
Notes
1. www.weforum.org/press/2020/01/uncertainty-and-instability-the-world-in-two-
words-says-un-secretary-general
2. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Asia-Pacific
Centre of Education for International Understanding (UNESCO APCEIU); The
UNESCO Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable
Development (MGIEP)
3. See Globalcommonsreview.org
4. UNESCO (2015). Global Citizenship Education: Topics and Learning Objectives.
Paris: UNESCO.
5. See Carlos Alberto Torres. The Travails of Global Governance and Democratic Education.
Foreword to António Teodoro: Contesting the Global Development of Sustainable and Inclusive
xx Preface
Education. Education Reform and the Challenges of Neoliberal Globalization. (Routledge, New
York and London, in press)
6. Carlos Alberto Torres. ‘The Silent Revolution of Global Citizenship Education.’
www.taylorfrancis.com/sdgo/aboutus?key=leading-thoughts
7. Antonio Teodoro, José Beltran, Régis Malet, and Carlos Alberto Torres, Understanding
teacher praxis for sustaining the public good: A cross-national study of teacher bildung and global
citizenship education in an age of extremes. Research proposal in progress.
References
Bosio, E., & Torres, C. A. (2019). Global citizenship education: An educational theory
of the common good? A conversation with Carlos Alberto Torres. Policy Features in
Education, 1–16 .https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210319825517
Morrow, R. A., & Torres, C. A. (1995). Social theory and education: A critique of theories of
social and cultural reproduction. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Nino, C. S. (1996). The constitution of deliberative democracy. New Haven, CT and London:
Yale University Press.
Teodoro, A., Beltrán, J., Malet, R., & Torres, C. A. Understanding teacher praxis for sustaining
the public good: A cross-national study of teacher bildung and global citizenship education in an age
of extremes. Research Proposal in Progress.
Torres, C. A. (2017). Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global citizenship education
(Vol. 1). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Torres, C. A. (Ed.). (2019). The Wiley handbook of Paulo Freire. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons
and Blackwell.
Torres, C. A. (2020). The silent revolution of global citizenship education. Retrieved from www.
taylorfrancis.com/sdgo/aboutus?key=leading-thoughts
Torres, C. A. (in press). The travails of global governance and democratic education: Foreword
to António Teodoro: Contesting the global development of sustainable and inclusive educa-
tion: Education reform and the challenges of neoliberal globalization. New York and London):
Routledge.
Torres, C. A., & Van Heertum, R. (2009). Education and domination: Reforming policy
and practice through critical theory. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. Plank (Eds.),
Handbook of education policy research (pp. 221–240). New York: American Educational
Research Association and Routledge.
Torres, C. A., and Van Heertum, R. (2020). UNESCO as the global public intellectual
for the twenty-first century. In Humanist futures: Perspectives from UNESCO chairs and UNI-
TWIN networks on the futures of education. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2018). Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments. A review of education for
sustainable development and global citizenship education in teacher education. UNESCO-Global
Education Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.
Teachers’ Education and Global
Citizenship Education
An Introduction
Daniel Schugurensky and Charl Wolhuter
The Sustainable Development Goals and Global

Citizenship Education
For 21st century educational systems around the world, the processes of glo-
balization present a new host of challenges and opportunities for the promo-
tion of citizenship education. The traditional model of civic education of the
20th century aimed at promoting national identity and at nurturing obedience
to authority appears more and more outdated and insufficient to tackle many
contemporary challenges that cross international borders. At the same time,
the need for an education for citizenship that has a global scope and is guided
by critical and emancipatory approaches becomes more evident in the context
of worrying global trends. Among them are pandemics, global warming, ocean
acidification, freshwater scarcity, wider socioeconomic inequalities, nativism
and xenophobia, brain drain, the refugee crisis, chemical pollution, the misuse
of technology, the threat of nuclear weapons, and the rise of authoritarian rule
and democratic deconsolidation in various parts of the world (Foa & Mounk,
2017; Lenton et al., 2019).
Global citizenship education (GCED) could make a valuable contribution to
address some of these issues. Some of the contemporary impetus for GCED
can be traced back to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which
stressed that the inherent dignity and equality of rights of all members of the
human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.
Among the 30 articles of the Declaration, the second section of article 26 is
particularly relevant for readers of this book, because it stated the main aims
and purposes of education:
Article 26.2: Education shall be directed to the full development of the

human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and
friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further
the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
The two sentences of article 26.2 set out an important moral compass for edu-
cational systems around the world, and should be read in the context of the
2 Daniel Schugurensky and Charl Wolhuter
totality of civil, political and social rights that are part of the 1948 Universal
Declaration. At the same time, it is pertinent to acknowledge that in the mid-
20th century there were limited concerns among the international community
about education for sustainable development (ESD) and by extension about
sustainable development in general.
The ideas of article 26.2 appeared again in the report of the International
Commission on Education for the Twenty-First Century to UNESCO, also
known as the Delors Report. That report argued that education has an indis-
pensable role to play in promoting tolerance, peace and social justice globally.
Moreover, the Report pointed out that, among the four pillars proposed as
the foundations of education for the 21st century (learning to know, learning
to do, learning to be and learning to live together), the last one is of crucial
importance to foster international cooperation in the global village. From this
perspective, learning to live together refers to developing an understanding of
others and their history, traditions and values, to the recognition of our grow-
ing interdependence, to implement common projects and to manage conflicts
in a peaceful way (Delors, 1996).
A few years later, in the Earth Charter, adopted in 2000, the language of
ESD appears front and center. For instance, its article 14 called for the integra-
tion into formal education institutions and lifelong learning the knowledge,
values and skills needed for a sustainable way of life and for the provision
of educational opportunities that empower learners to contribute actively to
sustainable development. Two years later, in 2002, the Maastricht Declara-
tion conceptualized global education as “an 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”. The Maastrich
Declaration also proposed the five main dimensions connecting global educa-
tion with citizenship education: a) development education, b) human rights
education, c) education for sustainability, d) education for peace and conflict
prevention and e) intercultural education (Europe-wide Global Education
Congress, 2002, p. 2).
By 2015, the deadlines of both the Millennium Development Goals and the
Education for All (EFA) expired and were replaced with a new and ambitious
development program: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This
agenda includes 17 goals operationalized through 169 targets, to be achieved
by 2030. The fourth goal deals with education, and its seventh target updates
Article 26.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the 21st century
by incorporating (and expanding) the language of the Maastricht declaration.
Moreover, target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals makes an explicit
reference to education for global citizenship:
Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and
skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among
others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable
Global Citizenship Education 3
lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace
and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity
and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.
(UNESCO, 2017)
UNESCO has observed that target 4.7 is one of the most important targets
in terms of linkageswith other sustainable development goals. In this regard,
Benavot (2017) noted that as education becomes an integral member of the
grand international development coalition, it could gain new prominence and its
rightful place as the key enabler of all other sustainable goals. More speciﬁcally,
target 4.7 is closely connected to target 12.8 (“ensure that people everywhere
have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development
and lifestyles in harmony with nature”) and target 13.3 (“improve education,
awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change
mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning”). Along these
lines, Biccum (2018) called for a new politics of truth and knowledge in which
GCED contributes to the solution to global problems by nurturing the devel-
opment of critical, globally minded, globally competent and active citizens.
Likewise, Misiaszek (2017), in one of the recent books of this Routledge series,
called for an approach to sustainable development education that goes beyond
anthropocentric citizenship framings.
In short, target 4.7 is important for at least two related reasons. First, because
the traditional inward looking model of citizenship education is insufficient to
tackle many contemporary challenges that cross international borders. Second,
because education is a necessary condition to achieve many of the sustainable
development goals. Moreover, as UNESCO (2017) observed, target 4.7 touches
on the social, humanistic and moral purposes of education, connects educa-
tion to the other SDGs and captures the transformative aspirations of a new
development agenda. From the perspective of an emancipatory GCED, this
agenda has to consider at least three key challenges. First, significant inequali-
ties between and within countries that are further exacerbated by neoliberal
economic policies that privilege the profit-motive above the common good and
give rise to authoritarian regimes. The second is the prevalence of violence to
solve conflicts, from households and local communities to large-scale armed
conflagrations. The third is a planetary emergency that poses an existential
threat to civilization.
Evaluating Progress on Target 4.7: The Four Areas

of Indicator 4.7.1
Since 2030 is not too far off, it is pertinent to ask how we are going to know
whether the 193 countries that signed the Agenda 2030 are making significant
progress in achieving target 4.7. The main strategy advanced by the global
partnership is the indicator 4.7.1, which consists in evaluating the extent to
which global citizenship and ESD are mainstreamed in four areas: education
policies, curricula, student assessment and teacher education, the topic of this
book.
First, regarding national education policies, it is encouraging that U.N.
member countries have made a formal commitment to help achieve the SDGs,
and that over 85% report including human rights and fundamental freedoms
in education policy. However, gaps between discourses and practices are not
infrequent. Indeed, the signing of a document is not enough evidence to deter-
mine that a policy has been implemented. Additionally, self-assessments of
policy implementation may be biased (UNESCO, 2017). In some countries,
political environments favoring crude nationalistic perspectives and policies
may obstruct the inclusion of GCED in national education policies. Moreover,
education policies often compete with other priorities in the context of limited
budgets and an emphasis on standardized testing in a few specific subjects.
However, teacher educators can play an important role in reminding policy
makers and civil society of the Agenda 2030 commitments, particularly those
related to target 4.7; they can also develop creative strategies to persuade policy
makers to include GCED and ESD content in teacher education courses and
in K–12 curricula.
Second, the mainstreaming of ESD and GCED in national curricula is a
key strategy to achieve target 4.7 by 2030. Currently, countries address the
principles of ESD and GCED in a variety of ways. Among them are extracur-
ricular activities, specific subjects (e.g. civics), and cross-curricular and whole
school approaches. In the fifth UNESCO consultation (2012), it was reported
that about 50% of participating countries covered peace, non-violence, human
rights and fundamental freedoms, 16% of countries covered cultural diver-
sity and tolerance, and only 7% covered ESD. Likewise, only 7% of reporting
countries provided stand-alone courses on global citizenship subjects at any
level. In the sixth UNESCO consultation that took place in 2016, most coun-
tries (91%) reported more efforts in curriculum reform, especially regarding
equality, inclusion and non-discrimination. However, only 66% of countries
reported increased emphasis on global citizenship. In terms of peace educa-
tion, only 10% of textbooks had explicit statements on conflict prevention,
conflict resolution and reconciliation. This is troubling because these are
important topics to consider in developing a culture of peace and nonviolence.
Moreover, in some countries the textbooks still tend to glorify war and military
leaders, exclude pluralistic perspectives and undermine certain ethnic groups
(UNESCO, 2017). More comparative and international research is needed to
better understand the ways in which target 4.7 is translated into curriculum
content and textbooks, and how the curriculum is actually implemented by
actual teachers in educational institutions.
Third, regarding student assessment, a key challenge is the lack of consensus
on the desirable outcomes of GCED and ESD. Target 4.7 speaks of the knowl-
edge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, global citizenship,
human rights, peace and the like, but there is no shared agreement on the
specifics of these knowledge and skills. Moreover, knowledge and skills should
be complemented with the development of competencies, attitudes and values,
and there is no consensus on them either. The Global Citizenship Education
Working Group is addressing this challenge and has already identified eight
key global citizenship competencies that should be at the core of educational
efforts related to target 4.7: empathy, critical thinking/problem solving, abil-
ity to communicate and collaborate with others, conflict resolution, sense and
security of identity, shared universal values (human rights, peace, justice, etc.),
respect for diversity and intercultural understanding, and recognition of global
issues and interconnections between environmental, social and economic
dynamics (Brookings Institution, 2017). This is certainly good progress, but it
is still unclear how competencies like empathy, critical thinking, sense of iden-
tity or respect for diversity will be understood in different social, cultural and
institutional contexts, and how those understandings will translate in teachers’
pedagogical approaches and practices. As the different chapters of this book
will illustrate, it is possible to find a variety of approaches to GCED among
scholars, practitioners and teacher education programs. This leads us to the
area of indicator 4.7.1 that concerns this book: teacher education.
Teacher Education and Global Citizenship Education

Until recently, many countries had limited content on global citizenship and
sustainable development in both initial and in-service programs. This has cre-
ated a gap between K–12 school curricula that increasingly include GCED
and ESD content, on the one hand, and teachers who are rarely well pre-
pared to teach topics related to these fields, on the other. In the last few years,
however, many teacher education programs have started to incorporate these
topics. Among the areas relevant to SDG 4.7 that are increasingly covered in
teacher education are environmental awareness, intercultural competencies,
human rights and gender equality. Peace education has also gained traction
in teacher education programs, especially in conflict-affected contexts. These
efforts show a positive trend, but unfortunately they are often contingent upon
the interest, creativity, motivation and enthusiasm of individual teacher educa-
tors rather than overall institutional commitments. For this reason, these efforts
can be fragmented, limited and short-lived (Hunt, 2012; Bourn, Hunt, & Bam-
ber, 2017).
At least three reasons may help to explain the weak support for GCED
and ESD in many teacher education programs. The first is that other con-
tents (those more likely to be included in standardized testing) tend to take
precedence. The second is that the GCED and ESD contents tend to align
with a social constructivist and critical approach to teaching and learning that
contradicts the prevailing perspectives and pedagogical practices in teacher
education that are present in many societies. The third reason is that in many
countries GCED is perceived as a ‘difficult’ or ‘hot’ topic because it challenges
the discourse of national citizenship and the nurturing of national identities
that have provided the basis for one of the main purposes of public education
since its beginnings (allegiance to the nation-state), and because it engages with
controversial issues like colonialism and imperialism, world inequalities, global
poverty, migration, power relations and social justice (Ferreira, Ryan, & Davis,
2015; Gaudelli, 2016; Aktas et al., 2017; Bourn et al., 2017; McEvoy, 2017;
Harshman, Augustine, & Merryfield, 2015; Hutchings, 2018; Scoffham, 2018;
UNESCO, 2018; Rapoport, 2019).
Having said that, GCED is slowly permeating teacher education programs.
In these pioneering programs, the goals of citizenship education are no lon-
ger framed exclusively as promoting patriotism and fostering national identity.
Instead, these programs adopt a more comprehensive approach to citizenship
education that nurtures the development of planetary-minded, critical, glob-
ally competent and engaged citizens with an interest in understanding and
solving global problems (Biccum, 2018). As cellist Pablo Cazals once noted,
“the love of one’s country is a splendid thing, but why should love stop at
the border?” In other words, GCED aims to develop a sense of belonging
not just to one’s country but also to the broader global community, emphasiz-
ing our common humanity and the connections between peoples and between
local and global contexts. This teaching does not occur in a moral vacuum,
but in a normative framework guided by values and principles like of human
rights, democracy, social justice, intercultural understanding, inclusiveness
and respect for diversity (Davies & Pike, 2010; Torres, 2017a; Bosio, 2019;
Reilly & Niens, 2014). Hence, a key agenda of GCED is to go beyond notions
of national citizenship and support humanity’s struggle for the three Ps of the
‘global commons’: ‘planet, peace and people’ (Bosio & Torres, 2019). To put
it in UNESCO language, in the teaching of GCED “it is essential to avoid
narratives that glorify violence and militarism, and instead promote models
of peace and reconciliation, inviting students to question received knowledge”
(UNESCO, 2018, p. 210). Moreover, UNESCO’s discourse on GCED empha-
sizes the need to nurture respect and solidarity in learners in order to build a
sense of belonging to a common humanity and help them become responsible
and active global citizens in building inclusive, just and peaceful societies.
However, in some quarters this discourse on GCED has been perceived as
a façade that hides a project to promote ‘globalization’, meaning by this the
imposition of western values and practices in all continents. This may be a mis-
placed criticism, as many societies around the world endorse ideas that are at
the core of GCED. As Deardorff, Kiwan, & Pak (2018) have observed, among
them are the 12th century Charter of Manden in Mali, the main principles
of the 1789 French revolution (liberté, egalité, fraternité), the philosophies of
Ubuntu in Africa and Sumak Kawsay (buen vivir, or well living) in Bolivia and
Ecuador, the Gross National Happiness in Bhutan, the concepts of Karama,
Aadala, Nithaam (Freedom, Dignity, Justice, Order) in Tunisia, the Hongik-
Ingan approach in Korea and the practices of Shura in several Islamic coun-
tries, to name a few. Deardorff and her colleagues pointed out that these local
concepts resonate with the three notions that distinguish UNESCO’s approach
to Global Citizenship Education from other educational approaches: “respect
for diversity”, “solidarity”, and a “shared sense of humanity”.
Of the four areas contemplated by the educational community to make
progress towards the achievement of target 4.7 (education policies, curricula,
student assessment and teacher education) we decided to focus on teacher edu-
cation because, in our view, the role of teachers will be pivotal in forging a new
model of planetary citizenship in which national citizenship would be a subsid-
iary or scaffolding part. The belief that the teacher is a very important factor
in determining the quality of any education project was explicitly stated in
the report What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future (National Commission
on Teaching & America’s Future, 1996) and borne out by empirical research.
Indeed, while it is widely acknowledged that many out-of-school factors (such
as individual characteristics, family background, socioeconomic factors and
neighborhood experiences) contribute to a student’s academic performance,
the available evidence suggests that among school-related factors, teachers
matter most. For instance, when it comes to student performance on reading
and math tests, a teacher is estimated to have two to three times the impact of
any other school factor, including services, facilities, and even leadership (Rand
Corporation, 2012; Jackson, 2012; Slater, Davies, & Burgess, 2012; Gershen-
son, 2016; Harris, Jones, & Huffman, 2017). Moreover, several studies have
found that the effect of teaching on student learning is stronger for poor and/
or minority students than for their more affluent and/or white peers, and that
the effects accumulate over the years Sanders & Horn, 1998; Center for Public
Education, 2005; Metzler & Woessmann, 2010).
This means that teachers can make a significant difference in the way GCED
is taught and learned in actual classrooms, and teacher education can make a
difference in the development of the content knowledge and the pedagogical
knowledge of teachers in the area of GCED. Teachers are uniquely situated
to expand students’ perspectives, to challenge ethnocentric assumptions and to
introduce them to different places and cultures. This is important, because if
teachers do not take this role, they may perpetuate stereotypes and repeat the
patterns of thought that justified ideas of cultural superiority and colonialism
(Martin, 2012; Andreotti, 2013; Scoffham, 2013, 2018). Teachers can also play
an important role in problematizing blind patriotism, understood as an attach-
ment to country characterized by unquestioning positive evaluation, staunch
allegiance and intolerance of criticism. Conversely, constructive patriotism
is characterized by support for questioning and criticism of group practices
that are intended to result in positive change (Schatz, Staub, & Lavine, 1999).
From this perspective, teachers could be considered the main agents of change
to ensure that humanity makes substantial progress towards the achievement
of target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. In this context,
teacher education is the main pathway to ensure that changes are sustained
over time for several generations. In this regard, a recent international study
of target 4.7 in primary and secondary schools that included 18 countries
found that two key strategies to ensure the implementation of target 4.7 are
to integrate ESD and GCED across all subjects and to provide professional
development for teachers (Laurie, Nonoyama-Tarumi, Mckeown, & Hopkins,
2016).
However, ‘global citizenship education’ is not a term that is widely used by
teachers. One study, for instance, found that while teachers used a variety of
frameworks and curricular devices to raise students’ awareness of global prob-
lems and their understanding of global interdependence, on the one hand,
and believed in the importance of infusing global dimensions into all aspects
of citizenship education, on the other, they rarely used the concept of ‘global
citizenship education’. Moreover, teachers who participated in this study did
not have a clear vision of what global citizenship entailed and did not possess
a conceptual framework for teaching this and related concepts (Myers, 2006).
This is not entirely surprising if we consider that in most classrooms the text-
books determine what and how teachers teach, and only 25% of textbooks
worldwide mention global citizenship. Furthermore, close to 90% of secondary
school social studies and history textbooks focus on national citizenship (Buck-
ner & Russell, 2013; Hutchings, 2018).
Along the same lines, additional research on this topic suggests that despite
reform efforts to incorporate global dynamics in the education system, most
teacher education programs across the world still do not provide teachers with
the knowledge and attitudes for teaching in a global age, and when they
have them, they lack the confidence to translate them into classroom practices
(Schweisfurth, 2006; Kissock & Richardson, 2010; Shaklee & Baily, 2012; Park-
house, Glazier, Tichnor-Wagner, & Montana Cain, 2015; Tichnor-Wagner,
Parkhouse, Glazier, & Cain, 2016; Myers & Rivero, 2019). Moreover, it has
been found that teachers need more rigorous methodological, content and cur-
ricular assistance to teach emerging types of citizenship (Abowitz & Harnish,
2006; Lee & Leung, 2006; Meyer, 2006; Rapoport, 2009; Barth, Michelsen,
Rieckmann, & Thomas, 2016). A related challenge to using real-world peda-
gogical strategies is the difficulty that teachers (and most people, we would add)
have to keep up with new dynamics of globalization and anti-globalization
and with the new knowledge production about these issues ( Johnson, Boyer,
& Brown, 2011). Indeed, previous studies of pre-service education programs
recommended paying more attention to local-global relationships, to suprana-
tional dimensions of citizenship and to current scholarship on globalization
(Myers, 2006; Rapoport, 2010). More recently, McEvoy (2017) found that only
7% of countries included ESD in teacher education.
Six Tensions
Summing up, we would like to conclude this section by flagging six tensions in
teacher education and GCED. The first one is the tension between national
citizenship education and GCED. As Rapoport (2019) noted, since the time
when nationalism played a critical role in unifying new nations, nationality
and citizenship have been virtually synonymous terms. This constructed con-
flation of citizenship and national identity has resulted in citizenship education
programs that focused on preparing loyal citizens who would identify primarily
with the nation-state. In this context, the ideas of global citizenship are still
trying to find a place in the curricula despite the absence of a tradition in the
educational system. It is pertinent to recognize that although teacher education
programs have some degree of autonomy to determine their curricula, they
are also heavily influenced by dominant discourses, government guidelines and
educational policies and standards. Currently, in most countries the hegemonic
paradigm is still the one of national citizenship. The tension between these
two levels of citizenship education (national and global) is likely to continue
for several decades. Moreover, in some contexts, the tension between these two
levels is further complicated by the presence of subnational and supranational
identities that may create additional conflicts and negotiations in citizenship
education programs. As an example, in Catalonia we can observe conflicts and
complementarities among four identities: the Catalonian identity, the Spaniard
identity, the European identity, and the global identity.
The second tension, already hinted at in the previous pages, can be found in
the epistemological and normative approach to citizenship education. On the
one hand, the traditional approach does not problematize social reality, accepts
the status quo as given and nurtures a passive, obedient model of citizenship.
On the other hand, there is a critical perspective that examines power relations,
social inequalities and the legacy of colonialism and promotes a participatory,
justice-oriented and ecological model of citizenship. While in the first approach
nations are seen as natural, unquestionable entities, in the second approach
they are seen as social constructed ‘imagined communities’ (Anderson, 1983).
Likewise, whereas the first approach emphasizes obedience to existing laws, the
second approach also helps students to examine how laws have changed over
time, encourages them to propose new laws and policies and develops their
agency to increase their political efficacy.
The third tension can be observed inside the teacher education curriculum,
in the competition between citizenship education and other subject matters.
On the one hand, it is argued that teacher education can make an important
contribution to the fulfillment of the Sustainable Development Goals by incor-
porating ESD and GCED, peace education, human rights education, intercul-
tural education and related topics to the professional development of future
teachers. On the other hand, in many teacher education programs this content
is perceived as optional extras to core courses.
The fourth tension can be found between two distinct pedagogical approaches
in teacher education. GCED tends to favor experiential learning, problem
posing and project based learning, constructivist approaches, and a dialogue
between theory and practice. However, in many countries these approaches
challenge prevailing perspectives and practices in teacher education and are
often rejected or marginalized (Bourn et al., 2017).
The fifth tension relates to social class inequalities, particularly the GCED
opportunity gap between upper class students and low-income students. Upper
class students are more likely to become members of a mobile, global elite
class able to fully participate in the global political economy via international
travel, cosmopolitan capital and exposures to different cultures and global
issues. Lower income students have less opportunity, and teachers’ expectations
and practices tend to reinforce these inequalities. Teacher education can help
teachers to better understand this situation, to view students as potential global
citizens regardless of their SES, and to develop agency to encourage students
(and their families) to go beyond the focus on the development of knowledge
and skills to compete in the global society and consider collective action to
address social and environmental problems (Goren & Yemini, 2017). Last but
not least, the last tension relates to the fact that in many countries ESD and
GCED tend to be promoted along parallel lines within teacher education pro-
grams. While the language of target 4.7 is inclusive and has a holistic educa-
tional approach, both in schools and in teacher education programs ESD and
GCED tend to operate separately. In many cases, this is due to the disciplinary
separation between social studies and natural sciences.
This Book
This book is the latest addition to the Routledge series Critical Global Citizenship
Education: Globalization and the Politics of Equity and Inclusion. Hence, it is part of
a tradition that aims at engaging with the theory, research and practice of the
twin fields of global citizenship education and education for sustainable devel-
opment, especially regarding target 4.7 of the sustainable development goals
2030. In this context, this volume follows the contributions of prior volumes
of the series, particularly Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Critical Global
Citizenship Education (Torres, 2017b), and Teacher Education for Sustainable Develop-
ment and Global Citizenship: Critical Perspectives on Values, Curriculum and Assessment
(Bamber, 2019).
The main aim of this volume was to put together an international collection
of essays on global citizenship education and teacher education that reflected
theoretical debates, research findings and emerging practices from around the
world. In doing so, we had two purposes. The first was to bring more atten-
tion to the theme of global citizenship education among those interested in
teacher education. The second purpose was to raise the topic of teacher edu-
cation among all those working in the nascent scholarly field of global citizen-
ship education. The book is organized in two parts. The first part (Chapters
1–6) unpacks key conceptual and theoretical issues at the intersection between
global citizenship education and teacher education and connects them with
past and current research on teachers’ perspectives and on teacher education.
The second part of the book (Chapters 7–14) provides an overview of the land-
scape of global citizenship education and teacher education in different parts
of the world, with snapshots from different regions.
Part I (Chapters 1–6)

In the first chapter, Wiel Veugelers discusses teachers’ views on global citizen-
ship education. The chapter begins with a historical and theoretical discussion
on the concepts of globalization and citizenship, and then examines three
types of citizenship that emerged from his research with educators: adaptive,
individualized and critical-democratic citizenship. These three ways of understand-
ing citizenship correspond, in an ideal way, to specific pedagogical approaches,
goals and classroom practices. In terms of global citizenship, the chapter dis-
tinguishes among three models: an open global citizenship, a moral global citi-
zenship and a social-political global citizenship. The author argues that these
distinctions are grounded in different ideologies and have implications for edu-
cation policy and for citizenship education, teacher education and teachers’
professional development.
In the second chapter, Jennifer K. Bergen, Sharon A. Cook and Lorna
MacLean examine some of the pedagogical practices that aim to prepare
teacher candidates to teach civic education. Continuing the discussion of the
first chapter on different approaches to global citizenship education, this chap-
ter uses examples from Canada, England and the United States to explore
the main features of teacher education programs. The authors pay particular
attention to those features (e.g. goals, recognition of structural injustice, self-
reflexivity and definitions of citizenship engagement) that situate those teacher
education programs closer to ‘soft’ or to ‘critical’ approaches. The study found
that approaches to implementing citizenship education in teacher education
vary according to national context. While the three countries showed a prev-
alence of ‘soft’ initiatives, in Canada and the United States they also found
hopeful examples of ‘critical’ initiatives that embraced self-reflexive analysis
and actions oriented towards structural change.
In the third chapter, David Zyngier investigates the perceptions of teach-
ers and student teachers about global citizenship education. The study is part
of the international Global Doing Democracy Research Project, which has
more than 50 scholars in over 25 countries examining perspectives and per-
ceptions of democracy in education among pre- and in-service teachers as
well as among teacher educators. Through the lens of a critical framework,
the research compares these perceptions taking into account diverse political
contexts (what the author calls ‘old democracies’, ‘emerging democracies’ and
‘new democracies’. The findings suggest that most teachers view democracy
in a narrow or thin way and that this may impact on their classroom practice
where they would be teaching ‘about’ but not ‘for’ democracy. In the last part
of the chapter, Zyngier proposes a conceptual model that includes a continuum
of five distinct kinds of citizenship.
In Chapter 4, Seungho Moon and Charles Tocci discuss the implications
of three simultaneous, related trends on global citizenship education and on
teacher education: a re-emergence of populist ethno-nationalism, the forma-
tion of a highly mobile, massively wealthy transnational elite and the rapid
growth of migratory flows, particularly refugees and indigent labor. In this
context, they argue that global citizenship education in teacher education
plays a crucial role in fostering new conceptualizations of citizenship in vari-
ous regions of the world. Furthermore, they contend that teacher educators
working on global citizenship education need to develop innovative, layered,
and generative theoretical frameworks and practices in order to promote
conversations concerning equity for students of all backgrounds. Moon and
Tocci identify four main approaches to global citizenship education (a liberal
humanistic approach, a critical theory approach, a phenomenological, auto-
biographical approach and a post-structural, feminist approach) and examine
how each one of these approaches are taken up in the concrete practices of
teacher education.
In Chapter 5, Gustavo E. Fischman and Marta Estellés argue that global
citizenship education is often presented as the latest stage of natural processes
of pedagogical evolution and innovation, and consequently the best and most
comprehensive model. In addition, global citizenship education programs
are frequently considered as nationally located educational solutions able to
address and solve non-educational global problems. While the authors recog-
nize the potential transformative potential of global citizenship education in
teacher education, they are also concerned with the extension of redemptive,
romanticized conceptual frames that may have unintended (and possibly det-
rimental) implications for the promotion of ineffective pedagogical models. A
key concern of this chapter is that current calls for expanding global citizenship
education programs in teacher education (GCED-Ted) coincide with the con-
solidation of a Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) narrative that
advocates for the replacement of public education with private for-profit edu-
cational programs. The authors argue that the redemptive idealized prototype
of professional educators that underlies many GCED-TEd proposals is not
a good antidote for GERM, because it ultimately weakens the emergence of
serious challenges to the consumerist options offered by the neoliberal GERM
model.
In Chapter 6, Lynette Shultz and Maren Elfert explore the unique oppor-
tunity that UNESCO’s global network of schools offers for education for
global citizenship and highlight the importance of teacher education in such
a project. The chapter begins with a decolonial analysis of UNESCO’s educa-
tional goals and the system of UNESCO schools as well as with a geopolitical
analysis of knowledge. Throughout the chapter, Schultz and Elfert argue that
‘conviviality’ should be the guiding concept to place the work of education in
the context of ‘learning to live together’ as a resistance to current neoliberal
approaches to education. The notion of conviviality is rooted in ideas about
modes of living together and a concern for the human condition. Drawing
on this concept, the authors examine the network of UNESCO schools as
potential sites to transform education and society. The chapter concludes with
recommendations for teacher education to support and expand the goals of the
UNESCO schools.
Part II (Chapters 7–14)

Chapter 7 opens the second part of the book with a study that uses a decolonial
perspective similar to the previous chapter, but in this case in the particular
context of Africa. In this chapter, Samson Maekele Tsegay, Mcjerry Atta Bekoe
and Mulugeta Zemuy Zegergish focus on how GCED and teacher education in
Africa relate to educational policies, course content and pedagogical practices.
They argue that the interconnection between GCED and teacher education in
Africa can only be understood by looking at the socioeconomic and political
structure of a continent based on colonial legacy. They emphasize that pre-
paring student teachers for GCED requires a critical pedagogy approach that
could be used in any discipline and class, regardless of the subject specializa-
tion and course content.
In Chapter 8, Michael Goh and Megan C. Deutschman provide a detailed
examination of global citizenship education and teacher education in East,
South and Southeast Asia, a region with a heterogeneity of histories, econo-
mies, politics, ethnicities, languages and religions. The authors explain that in
countries of this region, citizenship education often aims at reconciling indig-
enous meaning and preservation of traditional values, one the one hand, and
modern foreign values that frequently come with developing democracies,
on the other. In pluralistic societies, this tension manifests in national iden-
tity struggles and debates on the crucial elements of citizenship that take into
account the complexity and multidimensional nature of the issue. In racially
homogenous or religiously theocratic societies, the question becomes how to
balance pride without marginalizing minority groups. Goh and Deutschman
also note that whereas GCED in Asia is becoming widespread, its implemen-
tation is not coterminous, nor is it always being implemented in the context
of UNESCO goals. This could be due to differences in the understanding of
terms and goals, to a variance in cultural preference or to a combination of
both factors. The chapter provides an overview of the situation in the region,
paying particular attention to China, India and Singapore, and to a less extent
to other countries such as South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines.
Chapter 9 continues the exploration of global citizenship education in
teacher education in Asia, with a focus on Vietnam. Hoa Truong-White and
Thi Nhat Ho point out that Vietnam is a particularly interesting context for
an analysis of global citizenship education given its socialist political organiza-
tion, open market economy and Confucian-Buddhist cultural heritage. After
discussing global citizenship education trends in China, Hong Kong, Singa-
pore, South Korea and Bhutan, the chapter focuses on Vietnam, and reports
the findings of a qualitative content analysis conducted to identify character-
istics of global citizenship education and education for sustainable develop-
ment underpinning the teacher education courses. As part of the Renovation
agenda, Vietnam introduced several global issues into the national curriculum,
including peace education, international cooperation, environmental edu-
cation and education to improve quality of life and also committed to inte-
grate global citizenship education into the national curriculum and in teacher
education, often in collaboration with UNESCO. The findings of the study
indicate that these reforms present several opportunities for engaging with
advocacy forms of global citizenship and with critical approaches that engage
with diverse perspectives, power relations and complexity and help students to
develop strategic solutions.
Chapter 10 takes us to the European continent. Alfredo Gomes Dias, Anto-
nio Ernesto Gómez Rodríguez, Antoni Santisteban and Joan Pagès Blanch
examine the coverage of global citizenship in the curricula of teacher educa-
tion programs in Spain and Portugal in the context of European Union policy.
The authors present evidence that documents the double dimension of citi-
zenship education: the development of a national identity, on the one hand,
and the development of a global consciousness, on the other. In Spain and
Portugal, this global consciousness has gained space in the discourse on civic
education as much as the various national identities, and in between these two
identities there is a powerful European conciousness. The chapter reviews sev-
eral policy documents that make reference to the development of competences
that allow students to understand and value the relations between economic,
social and political rights within a global perspective and to undertake a critical
interrogation and interpretation of the world and its problems. However, there
is a gap between those discourses and reality, as a large percentage of teachers
have not received any education in the teaching of global citizenship education
and do not feel competent to do so.
Interestingly, although Spain and Portugal share many features and both
are members of the European Union, in their teacher education programs
the topic of global citizenship education follows different traditions. In Spain,
global citizenship education is part of the civic education curricula, whereas in
Portugal it is directly related to development education. At the same time, in
both countries teacher education programs are supported by nongovernmental
organizations. At the end of the chapter, policies regarding initial teacher edu-
cation as well as continuous teacher education are considered and evaluated,
and recommendations for future development are advanced.
Chapter 11 continues the exploration of the European context with a com-
parative analysis of global citizenship in teacher education in four countries:
Austria, Czech Republic, Ireland and Italy. In this study, Massimiliano Taro-
zzi highlights the pedagogical ideas, educational approaches and theoretical
patterns underpinning the development and delivery of pioneering in-service
primary teacher education programs for GCED in order to identify success
factors, conditions for failure, and promising practices. The main argument of
this chapter is that teachers play a major role in GCED implementation and
teacher education is a strategic field for policy enactment. In the analysis of the
case studies, Tarozzi identified nine themes, 32 sub-themes, and three peda-
gogical narratives. The two main findings of this research address the politi-
cal dimension of the GCED implementation. The first is that the pioneering
programs explored demonstrate that collaboration between multiple actors is
critical for the success of teacher education programs. The second is that suc-
cessful collaborative and values-based programs enable teachers to achieve their
agency. In this regard, Tarozzi and his team found that collaborative teacher
education programs involving civil society organizations have considerable
potential for curriculum change and large-scale school reform and are highly
valuable in developing transformative processes, engaging teachers to achieve
positive agency towards school change. In contrast, teacher education based
on the mainstream culture of performativity, rigidly prescriptive curricula and
oppressive regimes of testing tends to inhibit teacher agency, de-professionalize
their role and dampen their enthusiasm and commitment for change.
In Chapter 12, Karen Pashby and Laura C. Engel examine global citizen-
ship education in teacher education programs in North America (Canada and
the United States). To begin this exploration, they revisited the pioneering study
of Merry Merryfield (1996) on teacher educators in these two countries and
noted that while the six components identified in that study remain relevant,
the neoliberalization of higher education has raised new challenges for GCED
in teacher education. Pashby and Engel point out that GCED in teacher educa-
tion is still tied up in the tensions of global citizenship and internationalization,
with overlapping and sometimes contradictory orientations like employability
and entrepreneurship, on the one hand, and global justice advocacy, on the
other. Likewise, they identify tensions between popular narratives about benev-
olent motives for internationalization and ongoing processes of colonization
and capitalist accumulation. Another tension was found between the emphasis
on global competences (the skills an individual must acquire to compete in a
global economy) and the development of critical discourse analysis informed
by decolonial approaches. In this regard, while Pashby and Engel acknowledge
the need to prepare teachers to take up complex issues facing local and global
communities as classrooms become more diverse, they also problematize the
assumptions and power relations underlying cross-cultural experience in the
form of service-learning trips.
Chapter 13 takes us from North America to Latin America. In this chap-
ter, organized in four sections, Miguel Angel Jara, Léia Adriana da Silva
Santiago, Sixtina Pinochet Pinochet, Gustavo A. González and Joan Pagés
Blanch present an overview of the situation pertaining to global citizenship
education in teacher education in Latin America, and then focus on four large
South American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Colombia. In the
first three countries, the curricula of citizenship education are still focused on
the consolidation of a democratic political culture. This can be explained by
the transition from dictatorial political systems to fragile democratic regimes
in the late 20th century, and the preoccupation to strengthen democratic insti-
tutions and practices. With the transition from military rule to democracy, a
paradigm shift from civic education to citizenship education took place, with
the introduction of themes such as diversity, inclusivity, human rights, gender
equality and participation. Colombia presents a different situation because the
main problem is the armed conflict between the government and the guerillas,
and this is reflected in the citizenship education orientation towards a post-
conflict society. The authors note that most educational laws, school curricula
and teacher education programs in these four countries tend to deal with the
national dimension of citizenship education, with only marginal references
to the concept of global citizenship. Sometimes, in between them there are
contents dealing with Latin American integration, identity and citizenship.
Although global citizenship education is mostly absent in teacher education
courses (both in pre-service and in-service training), the authors identified
some programs in which teachers and future teachers are introduced to global
citizenship education through comparative and international perspectives (e.g.
how other societies deal with conflict) and through the examination of topics
like universal human rights and universal values, multiculturalism and envi-
ronmental issues.
Concluding this international voyage through all continents, in Chapter 14
Niranjan Casinader takes us to Oceania and presents us a comparative analysis
of global citizenship education in teacher education programs in five countries:
Australia, New Zealand, Vanuatu, New Caledonia and Fiji. Casinader explains
that the geographical isolation of the States and Territories of Oceania has
significantly influenced the ways in which global citizenship education is con-
ceived and practiced within the region. He points out that even in the case of
larger, wealthier and more established contemporary societies such as Austra-
lia and New Zealand, national identity and sensibilities remain the starting
point. Similar to the findings reported in the previous chapter on Latin Ameri-
can, Casinader found that in Oceania global citizenship education remains an
exotic topic in teacher education programs. Hence, GCED in teacher educa-
tion tends to be the responsibility of units related to teaching area specialisms,
rather than being seen as a basic component of general teacher capability. This
particular curricular engagement with GCED is also reflected in the relevant
national professional teaching standards, in that GCED is not identified as a
specific aspect of teacher expertise. In the last part of the chapter, Casinader
reports that signs of a shift are appearing in different countries and describes
the case of Fiji, where capacity building in the GCED component is now
becoming an important aspect of teacher education.
We trust that this collection of essays on theoretical issues and regional over-
views on global citizenship education in teacher education makes a valuable
contribution to this incipient field of research, policy and practice, and hope-
fully assists teacher educators and teachers themselves in their quest for a more
just, sustainable and peaceful world.
References
Abowitz, K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary discourses of citizenship. Review of
Educational Research, 76(4), 653–690.
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism.
New York: Verso.
Andreotti, V. (2013). Global education and social change: The imperative to engage
with different discourses. Global Education in Europe, 171–177.
Aktas, F., Pitts, K., Richards, J. C., & Silova, I. (2017). Institutionalizing global citizen-
ship: A critical analysis of higher education programs and curricula. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 21(1), 65–80.
Bamber, P. (Ed.). (2019). Teacher education for sustainable development and global citizenship:
Critical perspectives on values, curriculum and assessment. New York: Routledge.
Barth, M., Michelsen, G., Rieckmann, M., & Thomas, I. (Eds.). (2016). Routledge hand-
book of higher education for sustainable development. Abingdon: Routledge.
Benavot, A. (2017). Education for people, prosperity and planet: Can we meet the sus-
tainability challenges? European Journal of Education, 52(4), 399–403.
Biccum, A. R. (2018). Editorial: Global citizenship education and the politics of con-
ceptualization. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 10(2),
119–124.
Bosio, E. (2019, September 28). The need for a values-based university curriculum.
University World News.
Bosio, E., & Torres, C. A. (2019). Global citizenship education: An educational theory
of the common good? A conversation with Carlos Alberto Torres. Policy Futures in
Education, 19(6).
Bourn, D., Hunt, F., & Bamber, P. (2017). A review of education for sustainable development and
global citizenship education in teacher education. UNESCO GEM Background Paper. Paris,
France: UNESCO.
Brookings Institution. (2017). Measuring global citizenship education: A collection of practices and
tools.Washington, DC: Brookings.
Buckner, E., & Russell, S. G. (2013). Portraying the global: Cross-national trends in
textbooks’ portrayal of globalization and global citizenship. International Studies Quar-
terly, 57(4), 738–750.
Center for Public Education. (2005.) Teacher quality and student achievement: Research review.
Retrieved March 16, 2017 from www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/
Staffingstudents/Teacher-quality-and-student-achievement-At-a-glance/Teacher-
quality-and-student-achievement-Research-review.html
Davies, I., & Pike, G. (2010). Global citizenship education: Challenges and possibilities.
In R. Lewin (Ed.,) The handbook of practice and research in study abroad (pp. 83–100). New
York: Routledge.
Deardorff, D., Kiwan, D., & Pak, S. Y. (2018). Global citizenship education: Taking it local.
Paris: UNESCO.
Delors, J. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Paris: UNESCO.
Europe-wide Global Education Congress. (2002), November 15–17. Maastricht global
education declaration. Maastricht.
Ferreira, J.-A., Ryan, L., & Davis, J. (2015.) Developing knowledge and leadership in
pre-service teacher education systems. Australian Journal of Environmental Education,
31(2,) 194–207.
Foa, R. S. & Mounk., Y(2017). The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy, 28(1),
5–16.
Gaudelli, W. (2016.) Global citizenship education: Everyday transcendence. New York: Routledge.
Gershenson, S. (2016). Linking teacher quality, student attendance, and student achieve-
ment. Education Finance and Policy, 11(2) 125–149.
Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2017). The global citizenship education gap: Teacher percep-
tions of the relationship between global citizenship education and students’ socio-
economic status. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 9–22.
Harris, A., Jones, M., & Huffman, J. B. (2017). Teachers leading educational reform: The power
of professional learning communities. New York: Routledge.
Harshman, J., Augustine, T., & Merryfield, M. (Eds.). (2015). Research in global citizenship
education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Hunt, F. (2012). Adopting a subject-based approach to integrating the global dimension in initial
teacher education. TEESNet Conference: London South Bank University.
Hutchings, J. (2018). The global education monitoring report. New York: UNESCO.
Jackson, C. K. (2012). Non-cognitive ability, test scores, and teacher quality: Evidence from 9th
grade teachers in North Carolina (No. w18624). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Johnson, P. R., Boyer, M. A., & Brown, S. W. (2011). Vital interests: Cultivating global
competence in the international studies classroom. Globalisation, Societies and Educa-
tion, 9(3–4), 503–519.
Kissock, C., & Richardson, P. (2010). Calling for action within the teaching profession:
It is time to internationalize teacher education. Teaching Education, 21(1), 89–101.
Laurie, R. Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y., Mckeown, R., & Hopkins, C. (2016). Contributions
of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) to quality education: A synthesis of
research. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 10(2), 226–242.
Lee, W., & Leung, S. (2006). Global citizenship education in Hong Kong and Shanghai
secondary schools: Ideals, realities and expectations. Citizenship Teaching and Learning,
2(2), 68–84.
Leicht, A., Combes, B., Byun, W. J., & Agbedahin, A. V. (2018). From Agenda 21 to
Target 4.7: The development of education for sustainable development. Issues and
Trends in Education for Sustainable Development, 25.
Lenton, T., Rockstrom, J., Gaffney, O., Rahmstorf, S., Richardson, K., Steffen, W., &
Schellnuber, H. (2019). Climate tipping points: Too risky to bet against. Nature, 575,
592–595.
Martin, F. (2012). The geographies of difference. Geography, 97(3), 116–122.
McEvoy, C. (2017). Historical efforts to implement the UNESCO 1974 recommendation on educa-
tion in light of 3 SDGs targets. Paris: UNESCO.
Merryfield, M. (1996). Making connections between multicultural and global education: Teacher
educators and teacher education programs. Washington, DC: American Association of Col-
leges for Teacher Education.
Metzler, J., & Woessmann, L. (2010). The impact of teacher subject knowledge on student achieve-
ment: Evidence from within-teacher within-student variation. IZA Discussion Paper 4999.
Bonn: IZA.
Misiaszek, G. W. (2017). Educating the global environmental citizen: Understanding ecopedagogy in
local and global contexts. New York: Routledge.
Myers, J. P. (2006). Rethinking the social studies curriculum in the context of globaliza-
tion: Education for global citizenship in the US. Theory and Research in Social Education,
34(3), 370–394.
Myers, J. P., & Rivero, K. (2019). Preparing globally competent preservice teachers: The
development of content knowledge, disciplinary skills, and instructional design. Teach-
ing and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 77(1), 214–225.
National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teach-
ing for America’s future. New York: Carnegie Foundation.
Parkhouse, H., Glazier, J., Tichnor-Wagner, A., & Montana Cain, J. (2015). From
local to global: Making the leap in teacher education. International Journal of Global
Education, 4(2).
Rand Corporation. (2012). Teachers matter: Understanding teachers’ impact on student achieve-
ment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Rapoport, A. (2009). A forgotten concept: Global citizenship education and state social
studies standards. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 33(1), 91–112.
Rapoport, A. (2010). We cannot teach what we don’t know: Indiana teachers talk about
global citizenship education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 5(3), 179–190.
Rapoport, A. (Ed.). (2019). Competing frameworks: Global and national in citizenship education.
Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Reilly, J., & Niens, U. (2014). Global citizenship as education for peacebuilding in a
divided society: Structural and contextual constraints on the development of critical
dialogic discourse in schools. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Educa-
tion, 44, 53–76.
Sanders, W. L., & Horn, S. P. (1998). Research findings from the Tennessee Value-
Added Assessment System (TVAAS) database: Implications for educational evalua-
tion and research. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12(3), 247–256.
Schatz, R. T., Staub, E., & Lavine, H. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment:
Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20(1), 151–174.
Schweisfurth, M. (2006). Education for global citizenship: Teacher agency and curricu-
lar structure in Ontario schools. Educational Review, 58(1), 41–50.
Scoffham, S. (2013). “Do we really need to know this?” The challenge of developing a
global learning module for trainee teachers. International Journal of Development Educa-
tion and Global Learning, 5(3), 28–45.
Scoffham, S. (2018). Global learning: A catalyst for curriculum change. International
Journal of Development Education and Global Learning, 10(2), 135–146.
Shaklee, B. D., & Baily, S. (2012). Introduction: A framework for internationalizing
teacher education. Internationalizing Teacher Education in the United States, 1–13.
Slater, H., Davies, N. M., & Burgess, S. (2012). Do teachers matter? Measuring the
variation in teacher effectiveness in England. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics,
74(5), 629–645.
Tichnor-Wagner, A., Parkhouse, H., Glazier, J., & Cain, J. M. (2016). Expanding
approaches to teaching for diversity and social justice in K-12 education: Fostering
global citizenship across the content areas. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24, 59.
Torres, C. A. (2017a). Why global citizenship?: An intervention in search of a theory. In
Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global citizenship education (pp. 14–19). New
York: Routledge.
Torres, C. A. (2017b). Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global citizenship education
(Vol. 1). New York: Routledge.
UNESCO. (2017). Measurement strategy for SDG target 4.7 proposal by GAML Task Force 4.7
global alliance for monitoring learning fourth meeting 28–29 November 2017 madrid. Spain
GAML4/17.
UNESCO. (2018). Accountability in education: Meeting our commitments. A review of education for
sustainable development and global citizenship education in teacher education. UNESCO-Global
Education Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.
References
1. At this time, we have researchers working on the project in Argentina, Australia,
Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Egypt, Finland, Greece, Iran, Malaysia,
Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey, Uruguay, and the
USA. The online survey has been translated into these local languages and has been
adapted and applied in over 25 international contexts. The comparative analysis
of these is an ongoing and major task for the Global Doing Democracy Research
Project http://doingdemocracy.ning.com/
Interested readers are encouraged to join the group and will be supported to rep-
licate the study in their context.
2. IEA-CIVED Civic education study 1999 and 2005.
3. This 2008 conference was organized by Professor Daniel Schugurensky. The first
conference of the series was held in 2003 in Toronto, and the third took place
in Rosario (Argentina) in 2010. The Doing Democracy by Learning Conference
attempts to address this gap by bringing together researchers interested in the theo-
retical and practical intersections between social action learning and participatory
democracy as well as their contribution to nurturing an enlightened and active
citizenship. Presentations at the Toronto conference examined past or present inno-
vative and progressive practices of transformative citizenship learning and participa-
tory democracy in different settings, including formal and non-formal educational
institutions, civil society organizations, municipal governments and workplaces.
4. Others have referred to democratic binaries such as weak and strong (Swift, 2002),
passive and active (Criddle, Vidovich, & O’Neill, 2004), minimalist and maximalist
(McLaughlin, 1992).
5. The massive youth led unrest of the 2011 Occupy Movement is an example of this
phenomenon.
6. In the most recent federal elections in Australia, where voting is compulsory, the
highest ever informal vote was recorded and over 1 million mainly young people did
not register to vote.
1. With a minor revision, conceptual definitions of phenomenology, critical theory,
and poststructuralist approaches appear in a book entitled, Moon, S. (2019). Three
approaches to qualitative research through the ARtS: Narratives of teaching for social justice and
community. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Brill|Sense.
1. See, for example, Blanks, 2013; Guo, 2014; McLean, Cook, & Crowe, 2006; Zong,
2009.
2. The idea of cosmopolitanism is almost as old as the ancient notions of citizenship.
At the end of the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC) and the erosion of power of
Athens as the model city-state, Diogenes of Sinope, an early critic of the notion of
the city-state, was asked what city he considered to be his home. His reply: “I am a
citizen of the world (cosmopolites)” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes
3. As Rizvi and Beech note, cosmopolitan ideals cannot be separated from a global
ambition. “The idea of cosmopolitanism has traditionally been linked to notions of
social solidarity, cohesion and a global sense of belonging (Nussbaum, 2002). What
cosmopolitanism challenges is the spatial reference for social solidarity. So if com-
munitarianism is based on the idea of solidarity across a given community (Etzioni,
2004), and nationalism implies developing a sense of belonging to a nation (Smith,
2010), cosmopolitanism appeals to solidarity and belonging along the whole cos-
mos or the universe” (Rizvi & Beech, 2017, p. 127).
4. For this reason, some scholars advocate for what they call “multiple citizenship”
(Held, 1997, 2016; Urry, 1998), which implies recognition of the plurality of levels
where citizen engagement can take place: the state, the local, the supra-state and/
or transnational level.
5. See Archibugi & Held, 2011; Benhabib, 2005; Benhabib et al., 2006; Held, 1997,
2010, 2016.
6. Political philosopher Seyla Benhabib (2005), one of the most influential scholars
in the field, conceptualizes that contemporary societies are witnessing processes of
disaggregation of citizenship because the three the pillars of national citizenship
are becoming “unbundled”. Benhabib notes that these pillars, collective identity,
the privileges of belonging to a nation-state’s political identity, and the entitlement
to social rights and benefits of being ascribed to a given nation-state are no longer
integrated into a consistent coherent construct (Benhabib, 2005, 2007)
7. Others associate GCED with the connection of globalization and education
(Dolby & Rahman, 2008; Spring, 2008) or with different conceptions of citizen-
ship (Knight Abowitz & Harnish, 2006).
8. See Abdi & Shultz, 2008; Bennett, 2008; Carr & Porfilio, 2012; Davies, Evans, &
Reid, 2005; Dower, 2003; Evans, Ingram, MacDonald, & Weber, 2009; Hébert,
2010; Hicks, 2003; Kerr, 2002; Mundy, Manion, Masemann, & Haggerty, 2007;
Oxley & Morris, 2013; Peters, Blee, & Britton, 2008; Pike, 2000; Shultz, 2007.
9. See An, 2014; Appleyard & McLean, 2011; Blanks, 2013; Byker, 2016; Guo, 2014;
McLean, Cook, & Crowe, 2006.
10. Certainly, debates about its definition have been prolific and typologies abound: soft
and critical global citizenship education (Andreotti, 2006); neoliberal, radical and
transformational approaches (Shultz, 2007); open, moral and sociopolitical global
citizenship (Veugelers, 2011); technical-economic and social justice approaches
(Marshall, 2011); cosmopolitan and advocacy types of global citizenship (Oxley &
Morris, 2013) and so forth.
11. Given those ambitious purposes, not surprisingly many authors have critiqued
that GCED ideals do not translate to real structural changes (Myers, 2006, 2016;
Rapoport, 2009, 2015). While many curricular documents could embrace global
goals, they nonetheless are firmly framed within the limits of each given nation-
state curriculum and standards. As Myers (2016) concludes his comparative analy-
sis, “the strategy of internationalizing the curriculum with global discourses for
citizenship education has rarely challenged the dominant national paradigm”
(p. 8). It appears that in terms of its institutionalization, while GCED as field has
developed a lot during last years, there is still a long way to be consolidated (Gaud-
elli, 2016).
12. Weenink (2008) defines cosmopolitan capital as “a propensity to engage in global-
izing social arena. [It] comprises bodily and mental predispositions and competen-
cies (savoir faire), which help to engage confidently in such arenas. Moreover, it
provides a competitive edge, a head start vis-à-vis competitors. People accumu-
late, deploy, and display cosmopolitan capital while living abroad for some time,
visit and host friends from different nationalities, attend meetings frequently for an
international audience, maintain a globally dispersed circle of friends or relatives,
read books, magazines, and journals that reach a global audience, and possess a
near-native mastery of English and at least one other language” (p. 1092).
13. It is important to consider that the 76% of IB schools are in Anglo-Saxon coun-
tries, but the organization is also expanding in the Global South. (IBO, 2013).
14. According to the study done by Parmenter (2011), 56% of the top 250 articles
related to GCED on WorldCat were from US institutions, 18% from UK institu-
tions, 6% from Australian institutions and 5% from Canadian institutions (p. 370).
15. See the critical assessments of Apple (2011), Bates (2008), Sleeter (2008), Romero
and Luis (2007) and Tonna (2007).
1. www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/preamble/index.html
1. We use the term country, nation, and territory interchangeably when referring to
regions of Asia, recognizing that Hong Kong and Taiwan are autonomous territo-
ries of Mainland China.
2. Pseudonym.
3. The term ethnic minority group is commonly used in government documents and
academic writing in Vietnam.
4. In recent years, the Vietnamese government has started to pay more attention to
multicultural education, but mostly through extracurricular activities.
1. Ley Orgánica de Educación, 2/2006, 3 May
2. Ley Orgánica de Ordenación General del Sistema Educativo, 1/1990, de 3 de
octubre
3. Los Temas Transversales eran: Educación para la Salud, Educación Medioambi-
ental, Educación para la Convivencia y la Paz, Educación para el Consumo, Edu-
cación para la Igualdad de los Sexos, Educación Vial y Educación Multicultural
4. «BOE» núm. 5, de 05/01/2007. www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2007-
238. Accessed August 2017
5. CIVES is a non-governmental organization committed to the development of citi-
zenship and citizenship education. See: www.fundacioncives.org/
6. See: www.fundacioncives.org/rec/recursos/encuesta-sobre-el-estado-de-la-educacion-
para-la-ciudadania-en-espa-a-.html
7. Real Decreto 1393/2007, 29 October 2007, «BOE» núm. 260, de 30/10/2007
8. For example, see El País of 28 March 2008 “La Comunidad (de Madrid) anula un
curso para formar profesores de EpC”
9. HEGOA, in Sur en Euskera, is an Institute for Development and Cooperation
Studies created at the University of Pais. See www.hegoa.ehu.es/hegoa
10. See www.oxfamintermon.org/es
11. Lleida, 1988; Alicante, 2004; Almería, 2005; Bolonia, 2009; Sevilla, 2012 y Las
Palmas de Gran Canaria, 2016. Ver, y descargar, these materials can be down-
loaded from http://didactica-ciencias-sociales.org/publicaciones/libros/
12. See www.raco.cat/index.php/EnsenanzaCS
13. See Diário da República, 2.ª série—N.º 128–5 July 2017, 13881–13890
1. The Global Education Network of Europe (GENE) is a network of Ministries and
Agencies with national responsibility for Global Education in European countries.
GENE has supported by national EU governments through i.a. round tables, reports
and peer reviews. It has been created by the Council of Europe within the context
of the Maastricht conference in 2002. GENE has recently established the Academic
Network of Global Education and Learning (ANGEL) with the scope of establish-
ing and reinforcing a network between academics and researchers of GCED across
the globe and to fill the gap between research and policy makers (www.angel-net
work.net).
2. This research project took place within the framework of the EU co-funded Global
Schools project. Started in 2015, Global Schools was a three-year-long European proj-
ect carried out in ten EU countries by 17 partners, led by Autonomous Province of
Trento, Italy. It was co-funded by the DEAR Programme of the European Commis-
sion. The multinational research team was composed of Sandra Altenberger (AT),
Martina Novotna (CR), Ben Mallon (IE), Carla Inguaggiato and Debora Antonucci
(IT), and Massimiliano Tarozzi (Principal Investigator).
1. The National Ministry as well as the provinces and the autonomous city of Buenos
Aires recognize private education, of a confessional as well as of a non-confessional
nature. (Act 26.206. Section. 13)
2. Source: https://formacionciudadana.mineduc.cl/
3. For the implementation and information about content, cf. https://formacionciudadana.
mineduc.cl/
4. www.mineducacion.gov.co/1759/articles-339975_recurso_1.pdf
5. http://eduteka.icesi.edu.co/pdfdir/MENEstandaresCienciasSociales2004.pdf
6. www.mineducacion.gov.co/1621/articles-75768_archivo_pdf.pdf
7. Available at: www.doity.com.br/i-encontro-de-formao-em-liderana-juvenil-e-cidadania-
global-do-cilt. Accessed on: 04/07/2017
8. Programa de Diplomado, available at enhttp://pecuchile.cl/wp/informacion-
curso-ciudadania/Julio 2017
9. www.uts.edu.co/portal/seccion.php?id=790&key=3c5b87fb00ed864fabb234d1f50
303db
Aloni, N. (2007). Enhancing humanity. Dordrecht: Springer.
Andreotti, V. (2011). The political economy of global citizenship. Globalization, Societies
and Education, 9(3–4,) 307–310.
Appiah, K. (2005). The ethics of identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Apple, M. (1999). Power, meaning and identity. New York: Peter Lang.
Banks, J. (Ed.). (2017). Citizenship education and global migration. Washington, DC: AERA.
Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Beard, M. (2015). SPQR: A history of ancient Rome. London: Norton & Company.
Conrad, S. (2016). What is global history? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
De Groot, I. (2013). Adolescents’ democratic engagement. Utrecht: University of Humanistic
Studies.
Durkheim, E. (1971[1923]). Moral education. New York, NY: Free Press.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power and liberation. South Hadley, MA:
Bergin & Garvey.
Gaudelli, W. (2016). Global citizenship education: Everyday transcendence. New York: Routledge.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity.
Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2016). Global citizenship education in context: Teacher per-
ceptions at an international and a local Israeli school. Compare, 46(5) 832–853.
Green, A., & Janmaat, G. (2011). Regimes of social cohesion: Societies and the crisis of globaliza-
tion. Hampshire: Palgrave.
Gutman, A. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hansen, D. (2011). The teacher and the world. New York: Routledge.
education. Charlotte, NC: IAP.
Haste, H. (2004). Constructing the citizen. Political Psychology, 25(3), 413–440.
International Civic and Citizenship Education Study. (2010). ICCS 2009 international
report. Amsterdam: IEA.
International Civic and Citizenship Education Study. (2017). ICCS 2010 international
report. Amsterdam: IEA.
Isin, E., & Turner, B. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of citizenship studies. London: Sage.
Johnson, L., & Morris, P. (2010). Towards a framework for critical citizenship education.
Curriculum Journal, 21(1), 77–96.
Kennedy, K., Lee, W. O., & Grossman, D. L. (Eds.). (2010). Citizenship pedagogies in Asia
and the Pacific. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Leenders, H., Veugelers, W., & De Kat, E. (2008a). Teachers’ views on citizenship in sec-
ondary education in the Netherlands. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(2), 155–170.
Leenders, H., Veugelers, W., & De Kat, E. (2008b). Moral education and citizenship
education at pre-university schools. In F. Oser& W. Veugelers (Eds.), Getting involved:
Global citizenship development and sources of moral values (pp. 57–74). Rotterdam, Nether-
lands: Sense Publishers.
Leenders, H., Veugelers, W., & De Kat, E. (2012). Moral development and citizen-
ship education in vocational schools. Education Research International, 2012 https://doi.
org/10.1155/2012/901513
Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character. New York: Random House.
Macedo, D., Dendrinos, B., & Gounari, P. (2003). The hegemony of English. Boulder, CO:
Paradigm Publishers.
Mahbubani, K. (2008). The new Asian hemisphere: The irresistable shift of global power by the
East. New York: Public Affairs.
Mouffe, C. (2005). On the political. London: Routledge.
Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people. New York: Teachers College Press.
Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating humanity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Oser, F., & Veugelers, W. (Eds.). (2008). Getting involved: Global citizenship development and
sources of moral values. Rotterdam and Taipei: Sense Publishers.
Oxley, L., & Morris, P. (2013). Global citizenship: A typology for distinguishing its mul-
tiple conceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies, 3, 301–325.
Parker, W. (2017). Towards a powerful Human Rights Curriculum in schools. In J. Banks
(Ed.), Citizenship education and global migration (pp. 457–481). Washington, DC: AERA.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Power, F., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg’s approach to moral education.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Schama, S. (1988). The embarrassment of riches: An interpretation of Dutch culture in the Golden
Age. New York: Knopf Inc.
Sim, J. B-.Y. (2011). Social studies and citizenship for participation in Singapore: How
one state seeks to influence its citizens. Oxford Review of Education, 37(6), 743–761.
Spring, J. (2004.) How educational ideologies are shaping global society. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Teodoro, T., & Guilherme, M. (Eds.). (2014). European and Latin American higher education
between mirrors: Conceptual frameworks and politics of equity and social cohesion. Rotterdam,
Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Torres, C. A. (2017). Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global citizenship education.
New York: Routledge.
Touraine, A. (1997). What is democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Veugelers, W. (2007). Creating critical-democratic citizenship education: Empowering
humanity and democracy in Dutch education. Compare, 37(1), 105–119.
Veugelers, W. (2008). Youngsters in transformative and reproductive processes of moral
and citizenship education. In K. Tirri (Ed.), Educating moral sensibilities in urban schools
(pp. 79–91). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Veugelers, W. (2010). Moral values in teacher education. In International Encyclopedia of
Education (Vol. 7, pp. 650–655). Oxford: Elsevier.
Veugelers, W. (2011a). The moral and the political in global citizenship education:
Appreciating differences in education. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(3–4),
473–485.
Veugelers, W. (Ed.). (2011b). Education and humanism. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense
Publishers.
Veugelers, W. (2017a). Education for critical-democratic citizenship: Autonomy and
social justice in a multicultural society. In N. Aloni & L. Weinrob (Eds.), Beyond
bystanders: Educational leadership for a humane culture in a globalizing reality (pp. 47–59). Rot-
terdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Veugelers, W. (2017b). The moral in Paulo Freire’s educational work. Journal of Moral
Education, 46, 412–421.
Veugelers, W., De Groot, I., Llomovatte, S., & Naidorf, J. (2017). Higher education,
educational policy and citizenship education. Education and Society, 35(1), 27–42.
Veugelers, W., De Groot, I., & Stolk, V. (2017). Research for cult committee: Teaching common
values in Europe. Brussels: European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and
Cohesion Policy.
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for
democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237–269.
Zizek, B., Garz, D., & Nowak, E. (Eds.). (2015). Kohlberg revisited. Rotterdam, Nether-
lands: Sense Publishers.
Abdi, A. A., Shultz, L., & Pillay, T. (2015). Decolonizing global citizenship education. Boston,
MA: Sense Publishers.
Abdul-Jabbar, W. (2015). Reclaiming the citizen and renouncing citizenship. In A. A.
Abdi et al. (Eds.), Decolonizing global citizenship education (pp. 131–140). Boston, MA:
Sense Publishers.
Anderson, V., McKenzie, M., Allan, S., Hill, T., McLean, S., Kayira, J., . . . Butcher,
K. (2015). Participatory action research as pedagogy: Investigating social and eco-
logical justice learning within a teacher education program. Teaching Education, 26(2),
179–195.
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy and Practice: A
Development Education Review, 3, 40–51.
Andreotti, V. (2010). Glimpses of a postcolonial and postcritical global citizenship edu-
cation. In G. Elliott, C. Fourali, & S. Issler (Eds.), Education and social change: Connecting
local and global perspectives (pp. 238–250). London: Continuum.
Andreotti, V., & de Souza, L. (Eds.). (2012). Postcolonial perspectives on global citizenship educa-
tion. New York: Routledge.
Au, W. (2012). Critical curriculum studies: Education, consciousness, and the politics of knowing.
Battiste, M., & Semaganis, H. (2002). First thoughts on First Nations citizenship: Issues
in education. In Y. M. Hebert (Ed.), Citizenship in transformation in Canada (pp. 93–111).
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Bickmore, K. (2006). Democratic social cohesion (assimilation)? Representations of
social conflict in Canadian public school curriculum. Canadian Journal of Education,
29(2), 359–386.
Bickmore, K. (2008). Social justice and the social studies. In L. Levstik & C. Tyson
(Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 155–171). New York: Routledge.
Blimkie, M. M. F., Vetter, D., & Haig-Brown, C. (2014). Shifting perspectives and prac-
tices: Teacher candidates’ experiences of a First Nation, Métis, and Inuit infusion in
mainstream teacher education. Brock Education Journal, 23(2), 47–66.
Bondy, J. M., & Johnson, A. (2018). Race, national exclusion, and the implications
for global citizenship education. In I. Davies et al. (Eds.). The Palgrave handbook of
global citizenship and education (pp. 393–408). London: Springer Nature. https://doi.
org/10.1057/978-1-137-59733-5
Boyle-Baise, M. (1998). Community service learning for multicultural education: An
exploratory study with preservice teachers. Equity & Excellence of Education, 31(2), 52–60.
Boyle-Baise, M., & Kilbane, J. (2000). What really happens? A look inside service-
learning from multicultural teacher education. Michigan Journal of Community Service-
Learning, 7(1), 54–64.
Boyle-Baise, M., & Sleeter, C. (2000). Community based service-learning for multicul-
tural teacher education. Educational Foundations, 14(2), 33–50.
Butler, J. K., & Milley, P. (in press). Teacher candidates’ policy agency to reframe the
meaning of citizenship in the Ontario secondary school curriculum. Canadian Journal
of Education.
Chikoko, V., Gilmour, J. D., Harber, C., & Serf, J. (2011). Teaching controversial issues
and teacher education in England and South Africa. Journal for Education and Teaching,
37(1), 5–19.
Chin, K., & Barber, C. E. (2010). A multi-dimensional exploration of teachers’ beliefs
about civic education in Australia, England, and the United States. Theory & Research
in Social Education, 38(3), 395–427.
Christou, T. M. (Ed.). (2017). The curriculum history of Canadian teacher education. New York:
Routledge. https://doi-org.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/10.4324/9781315411378
Cone, N. (2012). The effects of community-based service learning on preservice teach-
ers’ beliefs about the characteristics of effective science teachers of diverse students.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(8), 889–907.
Cook, S. A. (2008). Give peace a chance: The diminution of peace in global education
in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada. Canadian Journal of Education,
31(4), 889–914.
Davies, I., Flanagan, B., Hogarth, S., Mountford, P., & Philpott, J. (2009). Asking ques-
tions about participation. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(1), 25–39.
Davies, I., Gregory, I., & Riley, S. C. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions of citizenship in
England. In W. O. Lee & J. T. Fouts (Eds.), Education for social citizenship: Perceptions
of teachers in the USA, Australia, England, Russia, and China (pp. 131–173). Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Deer, F. (2013). Integrating aboriginal perspectives in education: Perceptions of pre-
service teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(2), 175–210.
Dei, G. J. S. (2001). Rescuing theory: Anti-racism and inclusive education. Race, Gen-
der & Class, 8(1), 139–161.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New
York: The Macmillan Company.
Dion, S. D. (2007). Disrupting molded images: Identities, responsibilities and relationships—
teachers and Indigenous subject material. Teaching Education, 18(4), 329–342. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10476210701687625
Donald, D. (2012). Forts, colonial frontier logics, and Aboriginal-Canadian relations:
Imagining decolonizing educational philosophies in Canadian contexts. In A. A. Abdi
(Ed.), Decolonizing philosophies of education (pp. 91–111). Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.
Evans, M. (2006). Educating for citizenship: What teachers say and what teachers do.
Canadian Journal of Education, 29(2), 410–435.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company.
Geboers, E., Geijsel, F., Admiraal, W., & Dam, G. (2013). Review of the effects of citi-
zenship education. Educational Research Review, 9, 158–173.
Giroux, H. (2004). Critical pedagogy and the postmodern/modern divide: Towards a
pedagogy of democratization. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(1), 31–47.
Giroux, H. (2013). On critical pedagogy. New York and London: Bloomsbury Publishing Inc.
Harber, C., & Serf, J. (2006). Teacher education for a democratic society in England and
South Africa. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 986–997.
education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Hébert, Y. M. (Ed.). (2002). Citizenship in transformation in Canada. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, Inc.
Hughes, A. S., Print, M., & Sears, A. (2010). Curriculum capacity and citizenship edu-
cation: A comparative analysis of four democracies. Compare: A Journal of Comparative
and International Education, 40(3), 293–309.
Johnson, L., & Morris, P. (2010). Towards a framework for critical citizenship education.
Curriculum Journal, 21(1), 77–96.
Journell, W. (2010). Standardizing citizenship: The potential influence of state curricu-
lum standards on the civic development of adolescents. PS, Political Science & Politics,
43(2), 351–358.
Journell, W. (2013). What preservice social studies teachers (don’t) know about politics
and current events—and why it matters. Theory and Research in Social Education, 41,
316–351.
Kahne, J., & Sporte, S. (2008). Developing citizens: The impact of civic learning oppor-
tunities on students’ commitment to civic participation. American Educational Research
Journal, 45(3), 738–766.
Kanu, Y. (2011). Integrating aboriginal perspectives into the school curriculum: Purposes, possibilities,
and challenges. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Keating, A., Kerr, D., & Lopes, J. (2009). Embedding citizenship education (CE) in second-
ary schools in England (2002–2008), citizenship education longitudinal study: 7th annual report.
London: Department for Communities, Schools, and Families.
Kelly, D. M., & Brandes, G. M. (2010). “Social justice needs to be everywhere”: Imagin-
ing the future of anti-oppression education in teacher preparation. The Alberta Journal
of Educational Research, 56(4), 388–402.
Kennelly, J. (2009). Good citizen/bad activist: The cultural role of the state in youth
activism. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 127–149. http://
doi.org/10.1080/10714410902827135
Kennelly, J., & Llewellyn, K. R. (2011). Education for active compliance: Discursive
constructions in citizenship education. Citizenship Studies, 15(6–7), 897–914.
Kincheloe, J. (2008). Critical pedagogy primer (2nd ed.). New York: Peter Lang Publishing,
Inc.
Larsen, M. A., & Searle, M. J. (2017). International service learning and critical global
citizenship: A cross-case study of a Canadian teacher education alternative practi-
cum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 196–205.
Leonardo, Z., & Vafai, M. M. (2016). Citizenship education and the colonial contract:
The elusive search for social justice in US education. In A. Peterson, R. Hattam,
M. Zembylas, & J. Arthur (Eds.), The Palgrave international handbook of education for citizen-
ship and social justice (pp. 613–634). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Levine-Rasky, C. (2006). The practice of whiteness among teacher candidates.
International Studies in Sociology of Education, 10(3), 263–284. http://doi.org/10.1080/
09620210000200060
Llewellyn, K. R., Cook, S. A., & Molina, A. (2010). Civic learning: Moving from the
apolitical to the socially just. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(6), 791–812.
Losito, B., & Mintrop, H. (2001). The teaching of civic education. In J. Torney-Purta
(Ed.), Citizenship and education in twenty-eight countries: Civic knowledge and engagement at age
fourteen (pp. 157–173). Amsterdam: The International Association for the Evaluation
of Educational Achievement.
Maynes, N., Hatt, B., & Wideman, R. (2013). Service learning as a practicum experi-
ence in a pre-service education program. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(1),
80–99.
McLean, L. R., Bergen, J., Truong-White, H., Rottmann, J., & Glithero, L. (2017). Far
from apathetic: Canadian youth identify the support they need to speak about and act
on issues. Citizenship, Teaching, and Learning, 12(1), 91–108.
McLean, L. R., Cook, S. A., & Crowe, T. (2008). Imagining global citizens: Teaching
peace and global education in a teacher-education programme. Citizenship, Teaching
and Learning (UK), 4(1), 50–64.
McLean, L. R., & Truong-White, H. H. (2016). Toward self-authoring a civic teacher
identity: Service-learning in teacher education. McGill Journal of Education, 51(3),
1081–1101.
Miller, P. (2016). “White sanction”, institutional, group and individual interaction in
the promotion and progression of black and minority ethnic academics and teach-
ers in England. Power and Education, 8(3), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1757743816672880
Milner, H., & Lewis, J. P. (2011). It’s what happens on the front lines of civic education
policy that matters: Reflection on a natural experience on youth turnout in Ontario.
Canadian Political Science Review, 5(2), 136–146.
Mirra, N., Morrell, E. D., Cain, E., Scorza, D., & Ford, A. (2013). Educating for a
critical democracy: Civic participation reimagined in the council of youth research.
Democracy & Education, 21(1), 1–10.
Mundy, K., & Manion, C. (2008). Global education in Canadian elementary schools:
An exploratory study. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 941–974.
National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. (2019).
A legal analysis of genocide: Supplementary report of the national inquiry into missing and mur-
dered indigenous women and girls. Retrieved from www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/wp-content/
uploads/2019/06/Supplementary-Report_Genocide.pdf
Osler, A. (2011). Teacher interpretations of citizenship education: National identity,
cosmopolitan ideals, and political realities. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(1), 1–24.
Pasek, J., Feldman, L., Romer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2008). Schools as incubators of
democratic participation: Building long-term political efficacy with civic education.
Applied Developmental Science, 12(1), 26–37.
Pashby, K. (2012). Questions for global citizenship education: Education in the
context of the “new imperialism”: For whom, by whom? In V. Andreotti & L. de
Souza (Eds.), Postcolonial perspectives on global citizenship education (pp. 9–26). New York:
Routledge.
Pashby, K., & Andreotti, V. (2015). Critical global citizenship in theory and practice:
Rationales and approaches for an emerging agenda. In J. Harshman, T. Augustine, &
M. Merryfield (Eds.), Research in global citizenship education (pp. 9–34). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing.
Peck, C. L., & Pashby, K. (2018). Global citizenship education in North America. In
I. Davies et al. (Eds.). The Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education (pp. 51–65).
London: Springer Nature.
Peterson, A., Durrant, I., & Bentley, B. (2015). Student teachers’ perceptions of their
role as civic educators: Evidence from a large higher education institution in England.
British Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 343–364.
Peterson, A., Hattam, R., Zembylas, M., & Arthur, J. (Eds.). (2016). The Palgrave interna-
tional handbook of education for citizenship and social justice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Phelan, A. M., Pinar, W. F., Ng-A-Fook, N., & Kane, R. (2020). Introduction. In A. M.
Phelan, W. F. Pinar, N. Ng-A-Fook, & R. Kane (Eds.), Reconceptualizing teacher education:
A Canadian contribution to a global challenge (pp. 1–18). Ottawa: University of Ottawa
Press.
Ponder, J., Vander Veldt, M., & Lewis-Ferrell, G. (2011). Citizenship, curriculum, and
critical thinking beyond the four walls of the classroom: Linking the academic con-
tent with servicelearning. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38(4), 45–72.
Rapoport, A. (2015). Global citizenship education: Classroom teachers’ perspectives
and approaches. In M. M. Merryfield, T. Augustine & J. Harshman (Eds.), Research in
global citizenship education (pp. 119–135). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Reid, A., Gill, J., & Sears, A. (2010). Forming of citizens in a globalising world. In A.
Reid, J. Gill, & A. Sears (Eds.), Globalization, the nation-state and the citizen: Dilemmas and
directions for civics and citizenship education (pp. 3–18). New York: Routledge.
Ross, A., & Davies, I. (2018). Europe and global citizenship. In I. Davies et al. (Eds.). The
Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education (pp. 21–36). London: Springer Nature.
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59733-5
Ryan, J., Pollock, K., & Antonelli, F. (2009). Teacher diversity in Canada: Leaky pipe-
lines, bottlenecks, and glass ceilings. Canadian Journal of Education, 32(3), 591–617.
Schick, C., & St. Denis, V. (2005). Troubling national discourses in anti-racist curricular
planning. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 295–317.
Schugurensky, D., & Myers, J. P. (2003). Introduction—Citizenship education: Theory,
research and practice. Encounters on Education, 4, 1–10.
Schweisfurth, M. (2006). Education for global citizenship: Teacher agency and curricu-
lar structure in Ontario schools. Educational Review, 58(1), 41–50.
Sears, A. (1994). Social studies as citizenship education in English Canada: A review of
research. Theory and Research in Social Education, 22(1), 6–43.
Sears, A., & Hughes, A. (2006). Citizenship: Education or indoctrination? Citizenship
Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 3–17.
Shultz, B., & Baricovich, J. (2010). Curriculum in the making: Theory, practice, and
social action curriculum projects. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26(2), 46–61.
Shultz, L. (2007). Educating for global citizenship: Conflicting agendas and understand-
ings. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 53(3), 248–258.
Shultz, L., Abdi, A. A., & Richardson, G. H. (Eds.). (2011). Global citizenship education in
post-secondary institutions: Theories, practices, policies. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Sleeter, C. E. (2017). Critical Race Theory and the whiteness of teacher education.
Urban Education, 52(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916668957
Smith, K. (2016). Curriculum, culture and citizenship education in Wales: Investigations into the
curriculum cymreig. London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Solomon, R. P., Portelli, J. P., Daniel, B. J., & Campbell, A. (2005). The discourse of denial:
How white teacher candidates construct race, racism and “white privilege”. Race Eth-
nicity and Education, 8(2), 147–169. http://doi.org/10.1080/13613320500110519
Starblanket, T. (2018). Suffer the little children: Genocide, Indigenous Nations and the Canadian
state. Atlanta, GA: Clarity Press, Inc.
St. Denis, V. (2007). Uniting Aboriginal education with anti-racist education: Building
alliances across cultural and racial identity politics. Canadian Journal of Education, 30(4),
1068–1092.
Stein, S., & Andreotti, V. (2016). Postcolonial insights for engaging difference in edu-
cational approaches to social justice and citizenship. In A. Peterson, R. Hattam,
M. Zembylas, & J. Arthur (Eds.), The Palgrave international handbook of education for citi-
zenship and social justice (pp. 229–245). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stenhouse, V. L., & Jarrett, O. S. (2012, Winter). In the service of learning and activism:
Service learning, critical pedagogy, and the Problem Solution Project. Teacher Educa-
tion Quarterly, 51–76.
Strong-Boag, V. (2002). Who counts? Late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century
struggles about gender, race, and class in Canada. In Y. M. Hebert (Ed.), Citizenship in
transformation in Canada (pp. 37–56). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Sulentic Dowell, M. M. (2008). Academic service learning as pedagogy: An approach
to preparing preservice teachers for urban classrooms. Journal of Teaching and Learning,
5(2), 1–21.
Sunal, C., Kelley, L., & Sunal, D. (2009). Citizenship education in the elementary class-
room: Teacher candidates photograph and describe their perceptions. The Journal of
Social Studies Research, 33(1), 33–70.
Tinkler, B., & Tinkler, A. (2013). Experiencing the other: The impact of service-
learning on preservice teachers’ perceptions of diversity. Teacher Education Quarterly,
40(4), 41–62.
Torney-Purta, J. (2002). A school’s role in developing civic engagement: A study of ado-
lescents in twenty-eight countries. Applied Developmental Science, 6(4), 203–212.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRCC). (2015). Truth and reconciliation
commission of Canada: Calls to action. Retrieved March 13, 2020, from http://trc.ca/
assets/pdf/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf
Tupper, J. (2011). Disrupting ignorance and settler identities: The challenges of prepar-
ing beginning teachers for treaty education. In Education, 17(3), 38–55.
Tupper, J., & Cappello, M. (2012). (Re)creating citizenship: Saskatchewan high school
students’ understanding of the “good” citizen. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(1),
37–59.
Urrieta, L. Jr., & Reidel, M. (2008). Citizenship normalizing and White preservice social
studies teachers. Social Justice, 35(1), 91–108.
Wilkinson, G. (2007). Civic professionalism: Teacher education and professional ideals
and values in a commercialised education world. Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(3),
379–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607470701450593
Yemini, M. (2017). Internationalization and global citizenship. Switzerland: Springer Interna-
tional Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38939-4_4
Young, M. J. (2010). Problems with global education: Conceptual contradictions. Alberta
Journal of Educational Research, 56(2), 143–156.
Alliaud, A., & Duschatzky, C. (Eds.). (1998). Maestros: formación, práctica y transformación
escolar. Buenos Aires: Miño y Dávila Editores.
Andriotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice - A
Development Education Review (3): 11.
Armstrong, D. (2006). Dreaming our future: Developing democratic professional prac-
tice? Australian Educational Researcher, 33(3), 1–11.
Banks, J. A. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0022487101052001002
Banks, J. A., S. Cherry A. Mcgee Banks, Carlos E. Cortés, Carole L. Hahn, Merry M.
Merryfield, Kogila A. Moodley, Stephen Murphy-Shigematsu, Audrey Osler, Caryn
Park, & Walter C. Parker. (2005). Democracy and diversity: Principles and concepts for educating
citizens in a global age. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Center for Multicultural
Education.
Barber, B. R. (1984). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: Uni-
versity of California Press.
Barber, B. R. (2004). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age (20th anniversary
ed.). Berkeley, CA and London: University of California Press.
Carr, P. R. (2007) Experiencing democracy through neo-liberalism: The role of social
justice in education. Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies, 5, 307–341.
Carr, P. R. (2008). Educators and education for democracy: Moving beyond “thin”
democracy. International Journal of Education and Democracy, 1(2), 147–164.
Carr, P. R. and G. Thésée (2009). “The Critical Pedagogy of Understanding how Future
Educators Relate to Democracy.” Learning Democracy by Doing: 274.
Carr, P. R. (2010a). Does your vote count? Critical pedagogy and democracy. New York: Peter
Lang Publishing.
Carr, P. R. (2010b). Re-thinking normative democracy and the political economy of
education. Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies, 8(1), 1–40.
Carr, P. R., Zyngier, D., & Pruyn, M. (Eds.). (2012). Can education make a difference? Exper-
imenting with, and experiencing, democracy in education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age
Publishing.
Criddle, E., Vidovich, L., & O’Neill, M. (2004). Discovering democracy: An analysis of
curriculum policy for citizenship education. International Journal of Research & Method
in Education, 27(1), 27–41.
Darder, A., & Miron, L. F. (2006). Critical pedagogy in a time of uncertainty: A call to
action. Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies, 6(1), 5–20.
Davies, I., & Issitt, J. (2005). Reflections on citizenship education in Australia, Canada
and England. Comparative Education, 41(4), 389–410.
Dejaeghere, J. G., & Tudball, L. (2007). Looking back, looking forward: Critical citi-
zenship as a way ahead for civics and citizenship in Australia. Citizenship Teaching and
Learning, 3(2), 40–57.
Denzin, N. K. (2009). Critical pedagogy and democratic life or a radical democratic
pedagogy. Cultural Studies, Critical Methodologies, 9(3), 379.
Dobozy, E. (2007). Effective learning of civic skills: Democratic schools succeed in nur-
turing the critical capacities of students. Educational Studies, 33(2), 115–128. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03055690601068279
Fischman, G. E., & Haas, E. (2012). Beyond idealized citizenship education embodied
cognition, metaphors, and democracy. Review of Research in Education, 36(1), 169–196.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X11420927
Forsyth, A., & Tudball, L. (2002). Listening to the voices of teachers: How should we define and
implement civics and citizenship education in the future? Paper presented at the Australian
Association of Research in Education Annual Conference, Brisbane University of
Queensland. Retrieved from www.aare.edu.au/02pap/for02438.htm
Freire, P. (1974). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Furman, G. C., & Shields, C. M. (2005). How can educational leaders promote and
support social justice and democratic community in schools. In W. A. Firestone &
C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda for educational leadership (pp. 119–137). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Gale, T., & Densmore, K. (2003). Engaging teachers: Towards a radical democratic agenda for
schooling. Maidenhead and Philadelphia, PA: McGraw-Hill Open University.
Gandin, L. A., & Apple, M. W. (2002). Thin versus thick democracy in education: Porto
alegre and the creation of alternatives to neo-liberalism. International Studies in Sociology
of Education, 12(2), 99–116.
Garratt, D., & Piper, H. (2008). Citizenship education in England and Wales: Theoreti-
cal critique and practical considerations. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(5),
481–496.
Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond left and right: The future of radical politics. Cambridge: Polity
Press in association with Blackwell.
Giroux, H. A. (1993). La escuela y la lucha por la ciudadanía. México: Siglo XXI.
Giroux, H. A. (2000). Stealing innocence: Youth, corporate power and the politics of culture. Bas-
ingstoke: Palgrave.
Giroux, H. A. (2006, Fall). Higher education under siege: Implications for public intel-
lectuals. Thought & Action The NEA Higher Education Journal, 63–78.
Green, J. M. (1999). Deep democracy: Community, diversity, and transformation. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Howard, C., & Patten, S. (2006). Valuing civics: Political commitment and the new citi-
zenship education in Australia. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(2), 454–475.
Kahne, J., & Westheimer, J. (2003). Teaching democracy: What schools need to do. Phi
Delta Kappan, 85(1), 34–68.
Knight, T. (2000). Longitudional development of educational theory: Democracy and the class-
room. Paper presented at the Annual Conference Australian Association Research
in Education, The University of Sydney. Retrieved from www.aare.edu.au/00pap/
kni00515.htm
Lund, D. E., & Carr, P. R. (2008). Doing democracy: Striving for political literacy and social justice.
New York: Peter Lang.
McLaren, P., & Kincheloe, J. (Eds.). (2007). Critical pedagogy: Where are we now? New York:
Peter Lang.
McLaughlin, T. H. (1992). “Citizenship, Diversity, and Education: A Philosophical
Perspective.” Journal of Moral Education, 21(3), 235–250.
Osler, A. (1997). Black teachers and citizenship: Researching differing identities. Teachers
and Teaching, 3(1), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354060970030104
Porfilio, B. J., & Carr, P. R. (2010). Youth culture, education and resistance: Subverting the com-
mercial ordering of life. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Print, M. (2007). Citizenship education and youth participation in democracy. British
Journal of Educational Studies, 55(3), 325–345.
Prior, W. (2006). Civics and citizenship education. Ethos, 14(4), 6–10.
Rapeli, L. (2014). What should the citizen know about politics? Two approaches to
the measurement of political knowledge. Democratic Theory, 1(1), 58–93. http://doi.
org/10.3167/dt.2014.010104
Reid, A. (2002). Public education and democracy: A changing relationship in a global-
izing world Reid A. Journal of Education Policy, 17(5), 571–585.
Reid, A. (2005). Rethinking the democratic purposes of public schooling in a globaliz-
ing world. In M. W. Apple, J. Kenway, & M. Singh (Eds.), Globalizing education: Policies,
pedagogies, & politics (p. vii, 311 p.). New York: Peter Lang.
Reid, A., & Thomson, P. (2003). Introduction: What’s public about curriculum?
In A. Reid & P. Thomson (Eds.), Rethinking public education: Towards a public curriculum
(pp. i–xxvii). Brisbane: Post Pressed Australian Curriculum Studies Association.
Sacristán, J. F. G. (1992). Profesionalización docente y cambio educativo. In A. Allard &
C. Duschatzk (Eds.), Maestros: formación, práctica y transformación escolar Buenos Aires:
Miño y Dávila Editores.
Schugurensky, D. (2013). Foreward. In A. Abdi & P. R. Carr (Eds.), Educating for democratic
consciousness: Counter-hegemonic possibilities (pp. i–xii). New York: Peter Lang.
Schwille, J., & Amadeo, J.-A. (2002). The paradoxical situation of civic education in
schools: Ubiquitous and yet exclusive. In G. Steiner-Khamsi, J. Torney-Purta, &
J. Schwille (Eds.), New paradigms and recurring paradoxes in education for citizenship: An inter-
national comparison (Vol. 5, pp. 105–136). Oxford: Elsevier Science.
Seddon, T. (2004). Remaking civic formation: Towards a learning citizen? London Review
of Education, 2(3), 171–186.
Taylor, A. (1996). Education for democracy: Assimilation or emancipation for aborigi-
nal Australians? Comparative Education Review, 40(4), 426–438.
Torney-Purta, J., Schwille, J., & Amadeo, J.-A. (eds.). (1999). Civic Education across Countries:
Twenty-four National Case Studies from the IEA Civic Education Project. Amsterdam, Nether-
lands: IEA Secretariat.
Tudball, L. (2005). Changing constructions of ‘social education’ in Victoria: New challenges for teach-
ers. Paper presented at the Australian Association of Research in Education Annual
Conference, Parramatta. Retrieved from www.aare.edu.au/05pap/tud05657.pdf
Walsh, L., & Black, R. (2011). In their own hands: Can young people change Australia? Cam-
berwell: ACER Press.
Westheimer, J. (2008). No child left thinking: Democracy at-risk in American schools (Vol. 17).
Ottowa: University of Ottawa.
Westheimer, J. (2015). What kind of citizen?: Educating our children for the common good. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004a). Educating the “good” citizen: Political choices
and pedagogical goals. PS: Political Science and Politics, 37(2), 241–247. https://doi.
org/10.1017.S1049096504004160
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004b). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for
Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004c). What kind of citizen?: The politics of educating for
Zyngier, D. (2009). Doing Democracy: A comparative analysis of pre-service teacher
educators in Australia, Canada and the USA Paper presented at the American
Education Studies Association, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abrahamian, A. (2015). The cosmopolites: The coming of the global citizen. New York: Colum-
bia Global Reports.
Anderson, B. (2016). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origins and spread of nationalism
(2nd ed.). New York: Verso.
Andreotti, V., Biesta, G., & Ahenakew, G. (2015). Between the nation and the globe:
Education for global mindedness in Finland. Globalization, Societies and Education, 13(2),
246–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2014.934073
Appiah, K. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W. W. Norton.
Appleyard, N., & McLean, L. R. (2011). Expecting the exceptional: Pre-service profes-
sional development in global citizenship education. International Journal of Progressive
Education, 7(2), 6–32.
Aristotle. (1996). The politics: Book III. In S. Everson (Ed.), Aristotle: The politics of Aris-
totle and the constitution of Athens (pp. 61–90). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Banks, J. A. (2006). Cultural diversity and education: Foundations, curriculum, and teaching (5th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Butler, J. (2009). Frames of war: When is life grievable? Brooklyn: Verso.
Carr, P. R., Pluim, G., & Howard, L. (2014). Linking global citizenship education and
education for democracy through social justice: What can we learn from the perspec-
tives of teacher-education candidates? Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education,
4(1), 1–21.
Cushner, K. (2007). The role of experience in the making of internationally-minded
teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 27–39.
Davies, L. (2006). Global citizenship: Abstraction or framework for action? Educational
Review, 58(1), 5–25.
Englund, T. (2011). The potential of education for creating mutual trust: Schools as sites
for deliberation. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(3), 236–248.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977 (C.
Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books.
Freire, P. (1970/2006). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Gaines, A. M. (2016). Ambassadors of aesthetic experience: The healing legacy of
Maxine Greene. Teaching Artist Journal, 14(1), 24–29.
Gallagher, S. (2012). Phenomenology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2016). Global citizenship education in context: Teacher per-
ceptions at an international school and a local Israeli school. Compare: A Journal of
Comparative and International Education, 46(5), 832–853.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. New York: International Publishers.
Greene, M. (1989). Reflection and passion in teaching. In C. Eisele (Ed.), Reflective teach-
ing. Normal, IL: Illinois State University for the John Dewey Society for the Study of
Education and Culture.
Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essay on education, the arts, and social change. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Grossman, D. (2002). Multidimensional citizenship and teacher education. Pacific Asian
Education, 14(2), 36–45.
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Hansen, D. T. (2008). Curriculum and the idea of a cosmopolitan inheritance. Journal
of Curriculum Studies, 40(3), 289–312.
Huntington, S. P. (2004). Dead souls: The denationalization of the American elite.
National Interest, 75, 5–18.
Ibrahim, T. (2005). Global citizenship education: Mainstreaming the curriculum? Cam-
bridge Journal of Education, 35(2), 177–194.
Johnston, M., & Ochoa, A. (1993). Teacher education for global perspectives: A research
agenda. Theory into Practice, 32(1), 64–68.
Law, W. (2007). Globalization, city development and citizenship education in China’s
Shanghai. International Journal of Educational Development, 27(1), 18–38. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.04.017
Macann, C. (1993). Four phenomenological philosophers: Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Merleau-
Ponty. New York: Routledge.
Miller, J. L. (2006). Curriculum studies and transnational flows and mobilities: Feminist
autobiographical perspectives. Transnational Curriculum Inquiry, 3(2), 31–50. Retrieved
from http://nitinat.library.ubc.ca/ojs/index.php/tci
Moon, S. (2017). Reframing learning to teach diversity: Multicultural curriculum within
a cosmopolitan context. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 469–486.
Moon, S. (2019). Three approaches to qualitative research through the ARtS: Narratives of teaching
for social justice and community. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Brill|Sense.
Murphy, C. (2000). Global governance: Poorly done and poorly understood. International
Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944–), 76(4), 789–803.
Mutch, C. (2004). Teacher education for global citizenship: An example from New Zea-
land. Pacific Asian Education, 16(1), 42–55.
Niens, U., & Reilly, J. (2012). Education for global citizenship in a divided society? Young
people’s views and experiences. Comparative Education, 48(1), 103–118.
Nussbaum, M. (2002). Education for citizenship in an era of global connection. Studies
in Philosophy and Education, 21(4), 289–303.
Pillow, W. S. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as
methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies
in Education, 16(2), 175–196.
Pinar, W. F. (2009). The worldliness of a cosmopolitan education: Passionate lives in public service.
Pocock, J. (1995). The ideal of citizenship since classical times. In R. Beiner (Ed.), Theo-
rizing citizenship (pp. 29–53). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Popkewitz, T. (2008). Cosmopolitanism and the age of school reform: Science, education and making
society by making the child. New York: Routledge.
Roman, L. G. (2003). Education and the contested meanings of “global citizenship”.
Journal of Educational Change, 4(3), 269–293.
Roth, K. (2011). Good will: Cosmopolitan education as a site for deliberation. Educa-
tional Philosophy and Theory, 43(3), 300–312.
Santoro, N. (2009). Teaching in culturally diverse contexts: What knowledge about
“self ” and “others” do teachers need? Journal of Education for Teaching, 35(1), 33–45.
http://doi.org/10.1080/02607470802587111
Schattle, H. (2008). Education for global citizenship: Illustrations of ideological plu-
ralism and adaptation. Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/
10.1080/13569310701822263
Taylor, C. (1994). Politics of recognition. In C. Taylor, K. A. Appiah, J. Habermas, S. C.
Rockefeller, M. Walzer, S. Wolf, & A. Gutman (Eds.), Multiculturalism: Examining the
politics of recognition (pp. 25–73). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Todd, S. (2009). Toward an imperfect education: Facing humanity, rethinking cosmopolitanism.
Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
UNHRC. (2018). Facts at a glance. Retrieved from www.unhcr.org/en-us/figures-at-a-
glance.html
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive peda-
gogy. Albany, NY: SUNY.
van Manen, M., & Adams, C. A. (2010). Phenomenological research. In C. Kridel (Ed.),
The Sage encyclopedia of curriculum studies (pp. 641–645). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Walzer, M. (1989). Citizenship. In T. Ball, J. Farr, & R. L. Hanson (Eds.), Political innova-
tion and conceptual change. (pp. 211–220) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Ch., & Hoffman, D. M. (2016). Are WE the world? A critical reflection on self-
hood in U.S. global citizenship education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(56),
1–18.
Wootson, C. (2017, October 29). Saudi Arabia, which denies women equal rights,
makes a robot a citizen. The Washington Post. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.
com/news/innovations/wp/2017/10/29/saudi-arabia-which-denies-women-
equal-rights-makes-a-robot-a-citizen/?utm_term=.d6c8adcbdaca
Abdi, A., & Shultz, L. (Eds.). (2008). Educating for human rights and global citizenship. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Acedo, C. (2012). Internationalization of teacher education. Prospects, 42, 1–3.
An, S. (2014). Preparing elementary teachers as global citizenship educators. Journal of
Education, 194(2), 25–38.
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice: A
Development Education Review, 3, 40–51.
Andreotti, V. (2015). Global citizenship education otherwise: Pedagogical and theoreti-
cal insights. In A. Abdi, L. Shultz, & T. Pillay (Eds.), Decolonizing global citizenship educa-
tion (pp. 221–230). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Andreotti, V., & de Souza, L. M. T. M. (Eds.). (2012). Postcolonial perspectives on global citi-
zenship education. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. W. (2011). Global crises, social justice, and teacher education. Journal of
Teacher Education, 62(2), 222–234.
Education, 7(2), 6–32.
Archibugi, D., & Held, D. (2011). Cosmopolitan democracy: Paths and agents. Ethics &
International Affairs, 25(4), 433–461.
Arnold, E. (2014). Cultivating global citizens: Global citizenship education in a moment of neoliberal
globalization, Masters thesis. Simon Fraser University.
Aydarova, E., & Marquardt, S. K. (2016). The global imperative for teacher education:
Opportunities for comparative and international education. Forum for International
Research in Education, 3(1), 23–40.
Bates, R. (2008). Teacher education in a global context: Towards a defensible theory of
teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 34(4), 277–293.
Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualized society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bégin-Caouette, O. (2012). The internationalization of in-service teacher training in
Québec cégeps and their foreign partners: An institutional perspective. Prospects,
42(1), 91–112.
Benhabib, S. (2005). Crises of the republic: Transformations of state sovereignty and the pros-
pects of democratic citizenship. Justice, Governance, Cosmopolitanism, and the Politics
of Difference—Reconfigurations in a Transnational World, Humboldt-Universitat
zu Berlin, pp. 45–78.
Benhabib, S. (2007). Democratic exclusions and democratic iterations, dilemmas of
“just membership” and prospects of cosmopolitan federalism. European Journal of
Political Theory, 6, 445.
Benhabib, S., Waldron, J., Honnig, B., Kymlicka, W., & Post, R. (2006). Another cosmopoli-
tanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bennett, W. L. (2008). Changing citizenship in the digital age. In W. L. Bennett (Ed.),
Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth (pp. 1–24). Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. Oxford:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Blanks, D. E. (2013). Nobel women: Drama pedagogy for global citizenship education.
Global Partners in Education Journal, 3(1), 3–21.
Blevins, D. (2011). New directions in citizenship education: Globalization, state standards and an
ethical/critical social studies curriculum, Doctoral Dissertation. Retrieved from http://
rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1321839149
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bregman, R. (2017). Utopia for realists: How we can build the ideal world. New York: Back
Bay Books.
Byker, E. J. (2016). Developing global citizenship consciousness: Case studies of critical
cosmopolitan theory. Journal of Research in Curriculum & Instruction, 20(3), 264–275.
Camicia, S. P., & Franklin, B. M. (2011). What type of global community and citizen-
ship? Tangled discourses of neoliberalism and critical democracy in curriculum and
its reform. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 311–322.
Carnoy, M., Elmore, R., & Siskin, L. (Eds.). (2003). The new accountability: High schools and
high-stakes testing. New York: Routledge-Falmer.
Carr, P. R., Pluim, G., & Howard, L. (2014). Linking global citizenship education and
education for democracy through social justice: What can we learn from the perspec-
tives of teacher-education candidates. Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education,
4(1), 1–21.
Carr, P. R., & Porfilio, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Educating for peace in a time of ‘permanent war’: Are
schools part of the solution or the problem? New York: Routledge.
Dale, R., & Robertson, S. L. (2007). New arenas of global governance and international
organisations: Reflections and directions. In K. A. Martens, A. Rusconi, & K. Leuze
(Eds.), New arenas of education governance: The impact of international organizations and markets
on educational policy making (pp. 217–228). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Davies, I., Evans, M., & Reid, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique
of “global education” and “citizenship education”. British Journal of Educational Studies,
53(1), 66–89.
Review, 58(1), 5–25.
De Rivera, J., & Carson, H. A. (2015). Cultivating a global identity. Journal of Social and
Political Psychology, 3(2), 310–330.
DiCicco, M. (2016). Global citizenship education within a context of accountability and
21st century skills: The case of Olympus High School. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
24(57). http://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.24.2364
Dill, J. S. (2015). The longings and limits of global citizenship education: The moral pedagogy of
schooling in a cosmopolitan age. New York: Routledge.
Dolby, N., & Rahman, A. (2008). Research in international education. Review of Educa-
tional Research, 78(3), 676–726.
Dower, N. (2003). An introduction to global citizenship. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh
University Press.
Duckworth, R. L., Levy, L. W., & Levy, J. (2005). Present and future teachers of the
world’s children How internationally-minded are they? Journal of Research in Interna-
tional Education, 4(3), 279–311.
Dunn, A. H., Dotson, E. K., Cross, S. B., Kesner, J., & Lundahl, B. (2014). Reconsider-
ing the local after a transformative global experience: A comparison of two study
abroad programs for preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 36, 283–304.
Eidoo, S., Ingram, L. A., MacDonald, A., Nabavi, M., Pashby, K., & Stille, S. (2011).
“Through the kaleidoscope”: Intersections between theoretical perspectives and
classroom implications in Critical Global Citizenship Education. Canadian Journal of
Education, 34(4), 59–85.
Enslin, P. (2000). Education and democratic citizenship: In defence of cosmopolitan-
ism. In M. Leicester, C. Modgil, & S. Modgil (Eds.), Politics, education and citizenship
(pp. 149–150). New York: Falmer Press.
Evans, M., Ingram, L. A., MacDonald, A., & Weber, N. (2009). Mapping the “global
dimension” of citizenship education in Canada: The complex interplay of theory,
practice and context. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 17–34.
Evans, R. W. (2015). Schooling corporate citizens: How accountability reform has damaged civic
education and undermined democracy. New York: Routledge.
Fischman, G. E., & Haas, E. (2012). Beyond idealized citizenship education embod-
ied cognition, metaphors, and democracy. Review of Research in Education, 36(1),
169–196.
Fischman, G. E., & Haas, E. (2014). Moving beyond idealistically narrow discourses in
citizenship education. Policy Futures in Education, 12(3), 387–402.
Gardner-McTaggart, A. (2016). International elite, or global citizens? Equity, distinc-
tion and power- the International Baccalaureate and the rise of the South. Globaliza-
tion, Societies and Education, 14(1), 1–29.
Gaudelli, W. (2009). Heuristics of global citizenship discourses towards curriculum
enhancement. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 25(1), 68–85.
Gaudelli, W. (2016). Global citizenship education: Everyday transcendence. New York:
Routledge.
Gimeno, P. (2009). Didáctica crítica y comunicación: un diálogo con Habermas y la Escuela de
Frankfurt. Barcelona: Octaedro.
Griffiths, R. (1998). Educational citizenship and independent learning. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Günel, E., & Pehlivan, A. (2016). Pre-service social studies teachers’ perception of
global citizenship. Journal of Education and Future, 10, 51–69.
Guo, L. (2014). Preparing teachers to educate for 21st century global citizenship: Envi-
sioning and enacting. Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education, 4(1), 1–23.
Hahn, C. L. (2005). Diversity and human rights in England and the United States. In
A. Osler (Ed.), Teachers, human rights and diversity (pp. 23–34). London: Trentham Books.
Handler, R. (2013). Disciplinary adaptation and undergraduate desire: Anthropology
and global development studies in the liberal arts curriculum. Cultural Anthropology,
28(2), 181–203.
Hartman, E., & Kiely, R. (2014). A critical global citizenship. In P. Green & M. John-
son (Eds.), Crossing boundaries: Tension and transformation in international service-learning
(pp. 215–242). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Hayden, M. (2011). Transnational spaces of education: The growth of the international
school sector. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(2), 211–224.
Heater, D. (2004). A history of education for citizenship. London: Routledge Falmer.
Hébert, Y. (2010). Politics, citizenship education policy in twelve countries, and cos-
mopolitanism: A commentary. In A. Reid, J. Gill, & A. Sears (Eds.), Globalization, the
nation-state and the citizen (pp. 230–240). New York: Routledge.
Held, D. (1997). La democracia y el orden global. Del estado moderno al gobierno cosmopolita.
Barcelona, Spain: Paidós.
Held, D. (2010). Cosmopolitanism: Ideals and realities. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Held, D. (2016). Elements of a theory of global governance. Philosophy & Social Criticism,
42(9), 837–846.
Hicks, D. (2003). Thirty years of global education: A reminder of key principles and
precedents. Educational Review, 55(3), 265–275.
Hursh, D. (2001). Neoliberalism and the control of teachers, students, and learning:
The rise of standards, standardization, and accountability. Cultural Logic, 4(1), 1–9.
IBO. (2013). IB fast facts. IBO. Retrieved from www.ibo.org/facts/fastfacts/
Jeffress, D. (2012). The “me to we” social enterprise: Global education as lifestyle brand.
Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 6(1), 18–30.
Jorgenson, S., & Shultz, L. (2012). Global Citizenship Education (GCED) in post-
secondary institutions: What is protected and what is hidden under the umbrella of
GCED. Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education, 2(1), 1–22.
Kerr, D. (2002). Citizenship education: An international comparison across sixteen
countries. International Journal of Social Education, 17(1), 1–15.
Keynes, J. M. (2018). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. London:
MacMillan.
Knight Abowitz, K. (2008). On the public and civic purposes of education. Educational
Theory, 58, 357–376.
Knight Abowitz, K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary discourses of citizenship.
Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 653–690.
Larsen, M. A. (2016). Globalization and internationalisation of teacher education:
A comparative case study of Canada and Greater China. Teaching Education, 27(4),
396–409.
Larsen, M. A., & Faden, L. (2008). Supporting the growth of global citizenship educa-
tors. Brock Education, 17, 71–86.
Lingard, B., Martino, W., & Rezai-Rashti, G. (2013). Testing regimes, accountabilities
and education policy: Commensurate global and national developments. Journal of
Education Policy, 28(5), 539–556.
Longview Foundation. (2008). Teacher preparation for the global age: The imperative for change.
Retrieved from www.longviewfdn.org/122/teacher-preparation-for-the-global-age.
html.
Low, E. L., & Lee, S. K. (2012). Bringing Singapore’s teacher education beyond its
shores. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 11(1), 43–51.
Lugovtsova, A., Krasnova, T., & Torhova, A. (2012). Internationalizing teacher educa-
tion: The case of Belarus. Prospects, 42, 71–90.
Mannion, G., Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Ross, H. (2011). The global dimension in
education and education for global citizenship: Genealogy and critique. Globalization,
Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 443–456.
Marcus, G. E. (2002). Sentimental citizen: Emotion in democratic politics. Pennsylvania Univer-
sity, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Marshall, H. (2011). Instrumentalism, ideals and imaginaries: Theorising the contested
space of global citizenship education in schools. Globalization, Societies and Education,
9(3–4), 411–426.
McLean, L. R., Cook, S. A., & Crowe, T. (2006). Educating the next generation of
global citizens through teacher education, one new teacher at a time. Canadian Social
Studies, 40(1), 1.
Mundy, K., Manion, C., Masemann, V., & Haggerty, M. (2007). Charting global education
in Canada’s elementary schools: Provincial, district, and school level perspectives. Toronto, ON:
UNICEF Canada.
Myers, J. P. (2006). Rethinking the social studies curriculum in the context of globaliza-
tion: Education for global citizenship in the US. Theory & Research in Social Education,
34(3), 370–394.
Myers, J. P. (2016). Charting a democratic course for global citizenship education:
Research directions and current challenges. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(55),
1–19.
Rose, N. (1996). Governing “advanced” liberal democracies. In A. Barry, T. Osborne, &
N. Rose (Eds.) (2013), Foucault and political reason: Liberalism, neo-liberalism and the rationali-
ties of government (pp. 37–64). London: UCL Press.
Nilsson, I. (2015). Constructing global citizenship education: An analysis of OECD discourse
on global competence, Unpublished Paper. Department of Political Science, Lund
University.
Noddings, N. (2005). Global citizenship: Promises and problems. In N. Noddings (Ed.),
Educating citizens for global awareness (pp. 1–21). New York: Teachers College Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
OCDE. (2016). Global competency for an inclusive world. Paris: OECD.
Olmedo, I., & Harbon, L. (2010). Broadening our sights: Internationalizing teacher
education for a global arena. Teaching Education, 21(1), 75–88.
Osler, A. (2005). Teachers, human rights and diversity. London: Trentham Books.
tiple conceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies, 61(3), 301–325.
Parkhouse, H., Tichnor-Wagner, A., Cain, J. M., & Glazier, J. (2016). “You don’t have to
travel the world”: Accumulating experiences on the path toward globally competent
teaching. Teaching Education, 27(3), 1–19.
Parmenter, L. (2011). Power and place in the discourse of global citizenship education.
Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 367–380.
Peters, M., Blee, H., & Britton, A. (2008). Global citizenship education: Philosophy, theory and
pedagogy. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Pike, G. (2000). A tapestry in the making: The strands of global education. In T. Gold-
stein & D. Selby (Eds.), Weaving connections: Educating for peace, social and environmental
justice (pp. 218–241). Toronto, ON: Sumack Press.
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). London: Sage.
Popkewitz, T. S. (2008). Education sciences, schooling, and abjection: Recognizing dif-
ference and the making of inequality? South African Journal of Education, 28(3), 301–319.
Popkewitz, T. S. (2009). El cosmopolitismo y la era de la reforma escolar. La ciencia, la educación y
la construcción de la sociedad mediante la construcción de la infancia. Madrid: Morata.
Ramirez, F., Luo, X., Schofer, E., & Meyer, J. (2006). Student achievement and national
economic growth. American Journal of Education, 113(1), 1–29.
studies standards. Journal of Social Studies Research, 33(1), 91–112.
Rapoport, A. (2010). We cannot teach what we don’t know: Indiana teachers talk about
global citizenship education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 5(3), 179–190.
Rapoport, A. (2015). Global citizenship education. Classroom teachers’ perspectives
and approaches. In J. R. Harshman, T. Augustine, & M. M. Merryfield (Eds.),
Research in global citizenship education (pp. 119–135). Greensboro, NC: Information Age
Publishing.
Reimer, K., & McLean, L. R. (2009). Conceptual clarity and connections: Global edu-
cation and teacher candidates. Canadian Journal of Education, 32(4), 903–926.
Resnik, J. (2009). Multicultural education: Good for business but not for the state?
The IB curriculum and global capitalism. British Journal of Educational Studies, 57(3),
217–244.
Resnik, J. (2012). The denationalization of education and the expansion of the Interna-
tional Baccalaureate. Comparative Education Review, 56(2), 248–269.
Rizvi, F., & Beech, J. (2017). Global mobilities and the possibilities of a cosmopolitan
curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 47(1), 125–134.
Robbins, M., Francis, L. J., & Elliott, E. (2003). Attitudes toward education for global
citizenship among trainee teachers. Research in Education, 69(1), 93–98.
Roberts, A. (2007). Global dimensions of schooling: Implications for internationalizing
teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 9–26.
Robertson, S. L. (2015). What teachers need to know about the “Global Education
Reform Movement” (or GERM). In G. Little (Ed.), Global education ‘reform’: Building
resistance and solidarity (pp. 10–17). Britain: Russell Press.
Robertson, S. L., & Dale, R. (2008). Researching education in a globalising era: Beyond
methodological nationalism, methodological statism, methodological educationism
and spatial fetishism. In J. Resnik (Ed.), The production of educational knowledge in the global
era (pp. 19–32). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Romero, J., & Estellés, M. (2015). Educación para la ciudadanía y currículum: sus
regímenes de verdad en perspectiva histórica. In B. Borghi, F. F. García, & O. Moreno
(Eds.), Novi cives: Cittadini dall’infanzia in poi (pp. 63–76). Bologna: Pàtron Editore.
Romero, J., & Luis, A. (2007). ¿Sirven las políticas y prácticas de formación del profe-
sorado para mejorar la educación? Una respuesta desde el análisis de la construc-
ción social de la docencia. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 15(19). http://doi.
org/10.14507/epaa.v15n19.2007
Sahlberg, P. (2010). Rethinking accountability in a knowledge society. Journal of Educa-
tional Change, 11(1), 45–61.
Schugurensky, D. (2010). Citizenship learning for and through participatory democracy.
In E. Pinnington & D. Schugurensky (Eds.), Learning citizenship by practicing democracy:
International initiatives and perspectives (pp. 1–19). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge
Scholarly Press.
Sleeter, C. (2008). Equity, democracy, and neoliberal assaults on teacher education.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8), 1947–1957.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational Research,
78(2), 330–363.
Spring, J. (2015). Globalization of education: An introduction. New York: Routledge.
Stewart, V. (2007). Becoming citizens of the world. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 8–14.
Stiglitz, J. (2012). The price of inequality. New York: Norton & Company.
Stromquist, N. P., & Monkman, K. (2014). Globalization and education: Integration and contes-
tation across cultures. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Su, F., Bullivant, A., & Holt, V. (2013). Global citizenship education. In W. Curtis, et al.
(Eds.), Education studies: An issues based approach (pp. 231–244). Exeter: Sage/Learning
Matters.
Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (Ed.). (2007). Learning in the global era: International perspectives on
globalization and education. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Tonna, M. A. (2007). Teacher education in a globalized age. Journal for Critical Education
Policy Studies, 5(1), 1–28.
Trilokekar, R. D., & Kukar, P. (2011). Disorienting experiences during study abroad:
Reflections of pre-service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7),
1141–1150.
UNESCO. (2013). Global citizenship education: An emerging perspective. Outcome document
of the technical consultation on global citizenship education. Retrieved from www.unesco.
org/new/en/education/resources/online-materials/single- view/news/unescos_seoul_
consultation_deepens_understanding_of_global_citizenship_education/#.UjxKSX-
bFng
UNESCO. (2014). Global citizenship education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the
21st century. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/
002277/227729e.pdf
Urry, J. (1998). Globalization and citizenship. Department of Sociology, University of Lan-
caster, UK. Retrieved from www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/urry-globalization-
and-citizenship.pdf
Veugelers, W. (2011). The moral and the political in global citizenship: Appreciating
differences in education. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 473–485.
Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap. New York: Basic Books.
Wang, C., & Hoffman, D. M. (2016). Are WE the world? A critical reflection on self-
hood and global citizenship education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24(56).
Weenink, D. (2008). Cosmopolitanism as a form of capital: Parents preparing their
children for a globalizing world. Sociology, 42(6), 1089–1106.
Wilson, A., & Flournoy, M. A. (2007). Preparatory courses for student teaching abroad.
In K. Cushner & S. Brennan (Eds.), Intercultural student teaching: A bridge to global compe-
tence (pp. 34–56). Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Yemini, M. (2017). Internationalization and global citizenship: Policy and practice in education.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Zemach-Bersin, T. (2012). Entitled to the world: The rhetoric of U.S. global citizenship
education and study abroad. In V. Andreotti & L. M. T. M. de Souza (Eds.), Postcolo-
nial perspectives on global citizenship education (pp. 87–104). New York: Routledge.
Zhao, Y. (2010). Preparing globally competent teachers: A new imperative for teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 422–431.
Zong, G. (2009). Developing preservice teachers’ global understanding through com-
puter-mediated communication technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5),
617–625.
Abdi, A. A. (2008). Europe and African thought systems and philosophies of education:
“Reculturing” the trans-temporal discourses. Cultural Studies, 22(2), 309–327.
Abdi, A. A., Shultz, L., & Pillay, T. (Eds.). (2015). Decolonizing global citizenship education.
Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Andreotti, V. de O., & Stein, S. (2015). Higher education, development, and the domi-
nant global imaginary. The Association of Commonwealth Universities. Retrieved from
https://beyond2015.acu.ac.uk/submissions/view?id=142
Carneiro, R., & Draxler, A. (2008). Education for the 21st century: Lessons and chal-
lenges. European Journal of Education, 43, 149–160.
Delors, J., Al Mufli, I., Amagi I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., Geremek, B., . . . Zhou, N.
(1996). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commis-
sion on Education for the Twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO.
Dussel, E. (2013). Agenda for a South-South philosophical dialogue. Human Architecture.
Journal of Self-Knowledge, XI(1), 3–18.
Gaventa, J. (2006). Finding the spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6),
23–33.
Gilroy, P. (2005). Postcolonial melancholia. The Welleck Lectures. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Gilroy, P. (2008). Multiculture in Europe. Melancholia or conviviality. Lecture 26/05/2008.
Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/83659295
Gilroy, P. (2016). Antiracism and (re)humanization. In T. Claviez (Ed.), The common growl:
Toward a poetics of precarious community. New York: Fordham University Press.
Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham/, NC
and London: Duke University Press.
Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality. London and New York: Marion Boyars Publishers.
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and hetero-
geneity. Systems Practice, 5(1992), 379–393.
Lowenhaupt Tsing, A. (2015). The Mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in
capitalist ruins. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mabunga, R. A. S. (2016). Peace education among Unesco ASPnet schools and teacher
education institutions in the Philippines: A peace education framework. The Normal
Lights, 10(1), 78–108.
Moore, J. (2015). Capitalism and the web of life: Ecology and the accumulation of capital. London:
Verso.
Morawska, E. (2014). Composite meaning, flexible ranges, and conditions of convivial-
ity: Exploring the polymorph. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 17(4), 357–374.
Nowicka, M., & Vertovec, S. (2014). Comparing convivialities. Dreams and realities of
living-with-difference. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 17(4), 341–356.
Oxfam International. (2018). Reward work not wealth. Retrieved from www.oxfam.org/
sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-reward-work-not-wealth-220118-
en.pdf
Panelli, R. (2010). More-than-human social geographies: Posthuman and other pos-
sibilities. Progress in Human Geography, 34(1), 79–87.
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa. (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide.
London: Routledge.
Shultz, L. (2013). Engaged scholarship in a time of the corporatization of the university
and distrust of the public sphere: A decolonizing response. In L. Shultz & T. Kajner
(Eds.), Engaged scholarship: The politics of engagement and disengagement (pp. 43–54). Rot-
terdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Shultz, L. (2015). Decolonizing UNESCO’s post 2015 education agenda: Global social
justice and a view from UNDRIP. Postcolonial Directions in Education, 4(2), 96–115.
Shultz, L. (2017). UNESCO Associated Schools (ASPnet): How might the power of the
network be ignited? Global Commons Review, 26–28.
Shultz, L., & Abdi, A. A. (2017). Decolonizing information ethics for the liberation of
knowledge. In T. Samek & L. Shultz (Eds.), Essays on information ethics, globalization, and
citizenship: Ideas to praxis. New York: McFarlane.
Shultz, L., & Guimares-Iosif, R. (2012). Citizenship education and the promise of
democracy: A study of UNESCO associated schools in Brazil and Canada. Education,
Citizenship & Social Justice, 7(3), 241–254.
Shultz, L., Guimaraes-Iosif, R., Chana, T., & Medland, J. (2009). The impact of becoming
a UNESCO ASPnet school in Alberta and Manitoba, Canada, Alberta Teachers’ Association
Monograph No. 1. Edmonton, Canada: Alberta Teachers’ Association. Retrieved
from www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/
Human-Rights-Issues/MON-1%202009%20The%20Impact%20of%20Becom-
ing%20a%20UNESCO%20ASPnet%20School.pdf
UNESCO. (2015). Rethinking education: Towards a global common good? Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO ASPnet. (2003). UNESCO Associated School Project Network (ASPnet). Historical
review 1953–2003. “Navigators for peace”. Ko nga Kaiwhakatere mo te Rangimarie. 50th Anni-
versary International Congress. Quality education for the 21st century. Auckland, New Zealand,
2003 August 3–8. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001305/
130509e.pdf
UNESCO Associated Schools. (2014). ASPnet strategy 2014–2021. Global network of
schools addressing global challenges: Building global citizenship and promoting sustainable devel-
opment. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/
002310/231049E.pdf
UNESCO Associated Schools Project Network. (n.d. [2018]). Retrieved from https://
aspnet.unesco.org/en-us
UNESCO Internal Oversight Service. (2016, July). Evaluation of the UNESCO Associated
Schools Project Network (ASPnet). Evaluation Office. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002454/245418E.pdf
Watts, V. (2013). Indigenous place-thought & agency amongst humans and non-humans
(First woman and Sky Woman go on a European world tour!). Decolonization: Indigene-
ity, Education & Society, 2(1), 20–34.
Adegoke, K. A. (2003). Capacity building of lead teacher training institutions in sub-Saharan
Africa: Ghana. Accra, Ghana: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0014/001434/143483e.pdf
Adegoke, K. A. (2008, November 12–14). Towards the enhancement of teacher education in
the new millennium [Paper presentation]. Second Biennial National Conference on
Teacher Education at AOCOED, Lagos, Nigeria.
Akiwowo, A. (1980). Ajobi and Ajogbe: Variations on the theme of sociation. Nigeria: University
of Ife Press.
Antwi, M. K. (1992). Education, society, and development in Ghana. Accra, Ghana: Unimax
Publishers.
Asante, M. (2007). The history of Africa. New York: Routledge.
Assié-Lumumba, N. D. T. (2016). Evolving African attitudes to European education:
Resistance, pervert effects of the single system paradox, and the Ubuntu framework
for renewal. International Review of Education, 62, 11–27.
Banks, J. A. (2004). Teaching for social justice, diversity, and citizenship in a global
world. The Educational Forum, 68(4), 296–305.
Banks, J. A. (2008). Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age.
Educational Researcher, 37(3), 129–139.
BBC. (2017, July 8). Eritrea capital Asmara makes World Heritage list. Retrieved from www.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-40544406
Beaumont, P., & Stephen, C. (2011, October 23). Gaddafi’s last words as he begged for mercy:
‘What did I do to you?’. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/23/
gaddafi-last-words-begged-mercy
Berman, B. J. (1998). Ethnicity, patronage and the African State: The politics of uncivil
nationalism. African Affairs, 97(388), 305–341.
Bond, P. (2006). Looting Africa: The economics of exploitation. London and New York: Zed
Books.
Castro, A. J. (2014). The role of teacher education in preparing teachers for critical
multicultural citizenship. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 38(4), 189–203.
Cilliers, J. K. (1985). Counter-insurgency in Rhodesia. London, Sydney, Dover, and New
Hampshire: Croom Helm Ltd.
Clarke, M., & Drudy, S. (2006). Teaching for diversity, social justice and global aware-
ness. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(3), 371–386.
Connell, R. (2007). Southern theory: The global dynamics of knowledge in social science. Sydney:
Allen & Unwin.
Connell, R. (2014). Using southern theory: Decolonizing social thought in theory,
research and application. Planning Theory, 13(2), 210–223.
Corsiglia, J., & Snively, G. (2000). Rejoinder: Infusing indigenous science into western
modern science for a sustainable future. Science Education, 85(1), 82–86.
Daniel, A. O. (1980). Imperialism and dependency. Nigeria: Fourth Dimension Publishing
Co. Ltd., Enugu.
Davies, I., Evans, M., & Reid, A. (2005). Globalising citizenship education? A critique
of “global education” and “citizenship education”. British Journal of Educational Studies,
53(1), 66–89.
Davies, I., & Pike, G. (2010). Global citizenship education: Challenges and possibilities.
In R. Lewin (Ed.), The handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and
the quest for global citizenship (pp. 61–78). New York and Abingdon: Routledge.
Deng, F. M. (1997, June 1). Ethnicity: An African predicament. Retrieved from www.brookings.
edu/articles/ethnicity-an-african-predicament/
Dirar, U. C. (2007). Colonialism and the construction of national identities: The case of
Eritrea. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 1(2), 256–276.
Ekeh, P. P. (1975). Colonialism and the two publics in Africa: A theoretical statement.
Comparative Studies in Society and History, 17(1), 91–112.
Farahani, M. F. (2014). The role of global citizenship education in world peace and
security. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 934–938.
Freire, P. (2010). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The continuum International Pub-
lishing Group Inc.
Fuller, M. (2011). Italy’s colonial futures: Colonial inertia and postcolonial capital in
Asmara. California Italian Studies, 2(1).
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Goodlad, J. I. (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Hammett, D., & Staeheli, L. A. (2011). Respect and responsibility: Teaching citizenship
in South African high schools. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(3),
269–276.
Hasan, M. (2015, October 3). Reality check: Africa is not a country. Retrieved from www.
aljazeera.com/programmes/upfront/2015/10/reality-check-africa-country-
151003102911239.html
Hooks, B. (2010). Teaching critical thinking: Practical wisdom. New York and London:
Routledge.
Jenkins, O. B. (1991). Dealing with differences: Contrasting African and European world views.
Kenya: Communication Press.
Jenkins, O. B. (2007). Dealing with cultural differences: Contrasting the African and European
worldviews. Retrieved from http://strategyleader.org/langlearn/pdf/dealdiffbooklet.
pdf
Juma, C. (2012, November 22). Viewpoint: How tribalism stunts African democracy. Retrieved
from www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20465752
Kellner, D. (2002). Theorizing globalization. Sociological Theory, 20(3), 285–305.
Kenyatta, D. (2015, January 22). List of differences between African and European. Retrieved
from http://diallokenyatta.tumblr.com/post/108694272606/list-of-differences-
between-african-and-european
Kidane, E. (2004). A brief historical account of formal education in Eritrea. Retrieved from
www.ehrea.org/kidaneed.htm
Kinsella, L. (2017, December 4). Slave auctions uncovered in Libya. Retrieved from www.
news.com.au/world/africa/slave-auctions-uncovered-in-libya/news-story/0535a6e
a3ae33f7de417fd78bd5b1afc
Komba, W. L., & Nkumbi, E. (2008). Teacher professional development in Tanzania:
Perceptions and practices. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 11(3), 67–83.
Kwatemba, S. W. (2008). Ethnicity and political pluralism in Kenya. Journal of African
Elections, 7(2), 77–112.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant
pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2005). Self-managed learning groups in higher education:
Students’ perceptions of process and outcomes. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
75, 373–390.
Madeira, A. I. (2011). Popular education and republican ideals: The Portuguese lay mis-
sions in colonial Africa, 1917–1927. Paedagogica Historica, 47(1–2), 123–138.
Magnarella, P. (2002). Explaining Rwanda’s 1994 genocide. Human Rights and Human
Welfare, 2(1), 25–34.
Makki, F. (2011). Culture and agency in a colonial public sphere: Religion and the anti-
colonial imagination in 1940s Eritrea. Social History, 36(4), 418–442.
Marginson, S. (2010). Higher education in the global knowledge economy. Procedia Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2010), 6962–6980.
McGee Banks, C., & Banks, J. (1995). Equity pedagogy: An essential component of
multicultural education. Theory into Practice, 34, 152–158.
McKeman, B. (2017, December 3). The rest of the world has woken up, but migrants are still
sleepwalking into Libya slave markets. Retrieved from www.independent.co.uk/news/
world/middle-east/african-migrants-libya-slave-markets-aim-europe-refugees-
human-trafficking-smugglers-a8087591.html
Mimiko, N. O. (2010). Would Falola frustrations suffice?: Tradition, governance chal-
lenges and the prospects of change in Africa. In Niyi Afolabi (Ed.). Toyin Falola: The
man, the mask, the muse. North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press.
Ministry of Education. (2012). Overview of the education. Retrieved from http://www.
ecss-online.com/data/pdfs/ecss-OVERVIEW-EDUCATION-eritrea.pdfMorais,
B. D., & Ogden, C. A. (2011). Initial development and validation of the global citi-
zenship scale. Journal of Studies in International Education, 15(5), 445–466.
Nanjira, D. D. (2010). African foreign policy and diplomacy from antiquity to the 21st century
(Vol. 1). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Nikuze, D. (2014). The Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda: Origins, causes, imple-
mentation, consequences, and the post-genocide era. International Journal of Develop-
ment and Sustainability, 3(5), 1086–1098.
Nyambe, J. (1997). Curriculum for development or underdevelopment? An analysis of
some of the major evils of the current curriculum system, and the way forward. In R.
Avenstrup (Ed.), Shaping Africa’s future through innovative curricula (pp. 42–47). Windhoek:
Gamsberg Macmillan Publishers.
Omotosho, A. O. (1988). The impact of colonial education and culture on the Muslims
of Nigeria. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies, 1, 52–60.
Oziambo, B. (2010). The contribution of head teachers to curb teacher misconduct in Tanzania
public primary schools, Unpublished Master’s Dissertation. University of Dar es Salaam,
Dar es Salaam.
Oxfam. (2016). Education for global citizenship: A guide for schools. London: Oxfam GB.
Paglia, P. (2007). Ethnicity and tribalism: Are these the root causes of the Sudanese civil
conflicts? Africa Economic Analysis. Retrieved from www.africaeconomicanalysis.org/
articles/pdf/sudan0807.pdf
Prinsloo, E. (2007). Implementation of life orientation programmes in the new curricu-
lum in South African schools: Perceptions of principals and life orientation teachers.
South African Journal of Education, 27(1), 155–170.
Sanyal, B. C. (2013). Quality assurance of teacher education in Africa: Fundamentals of teacher
education development 5. Addis Ababa. UNESCO-International Institute for Capacity
Building in Africa. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002292/
229200e.pdf
Sayre, A. P. (2009). Africa. Minneapolis, MN: Twenty-First Century Books.
Shizha, E. (2006). Legitimizing indigenous knowledge in Zimbabwe: A theoretical anal-
ysis of postcolonial school knowledge and its colonial legacy. Journal of Contemporary
Issues in Education, 1(1), 20–35.
Smith, A. (2005). Education in the twenty-first century: Conflict, reconstruction and rec-
onciliation. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 35(4), 373–391.
Snively, G., & Corsiglia, J. (2001). Discovering indigenous science: Implications for sci-
ence education. Science Education, 85(1), 6–34.
Stoner, L., Perry, L., Wadsworth, D., Stoner, R. K., & Tarrant, A. M. (2014). Global
citizenship is key to securing global health: The role of higher education. Preventive
Medicine, 64(2014), 126–128.
Streitwieser, B., & Light, G. (2010). University students and conceptions of global citizenship: A
Case study (Working Paper No. 10–001). Evanston, IL: Center for Global Engagement.
Stromquist, N. P. (2002). Education in a globalized world: The connectivity of economic power,
technology, and knowledge. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Little field Publishers.
Suárez-Orozco, M. (2001). Globalization, immigration, and education: The research
agenda. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 345–366.
Tikly, L. (2003). Governmentality and the study of education policy in South Africa.
Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 161–174.
Tongsakul, A., Jitgarun, K., & Chaokumnerd, W. (2011). Empowering students through
project-based learning: Perceptions of instructors and students in Vocational Educa-
tion Institutes in Thailand. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(12), 19–34.
Torres, C. A. (1998). Democracy, education, and multiculturalism: Dilemmas of citizen-
ship in a global world. Comparative Education Review, 42(4), 421–447.
Torres, C. A. (2002). Globalization, education, and citizenship: Solidarity versus mar-
kets? American Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 363–378.
Tsegay, S. M. (2016). The role of higher education in nurturing global citizenship in
Eritrea. Spanish Journal of Comparative Education, 28, 183–201.
Van Haperen, M. (2012). The Rwandan genocide, 1994. In W. ten Have & B. Boen-
der (Eds.). The holocaust and other genocides: An introduction (pp. 97–119). Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press. Retrieved from www.niod.nl/sites/niod.nl/files/Rwan
dan%20genocide.pdf
Van Uden, J. M., Ritzen, H., & Pieters, J. M. (2013). Engaging students: The role of
teacher beliefs and interpersonal teacher behavior in fostering student engagement in
vocational education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 37(2014), 21–32.
Vinck, P., Pham, P., & Kreutzer, T. (2011). Talking peace: A population-based survey on attitudes
about security, dispute resolution, and post-conflict reconstruction in Liberia. Human Rights Cen-
ter. Berkeley: University of California.
Waghid, Y. (2009). Patriotism and democratic citizenship education in South Africa:
On the (im) possibility of reconciliation and nation building. Educational Philosophy and
Theory, 41(4), 399–409.
Wang, L. (2007). Diaspora, identity and cultural citizenship: The Hakkas in ‘Multicul-
tural Taiwan’. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(5), 875–895.
Wiley, D. (2013). Using “tribe” and “tribalism: To misunderstand African societies. Retrieved
from www.africa.upenn.edu/K-12/Tribe-and-tribalism-Wiley2013.pdf
Zabit, M. N. (2010, June). Problem-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills
in teaching Business Education in Malaysia: A literature review. American Journal of
Business Education, 3(6), 9–32.
Zepke, N. (2013). Student engagement: A complex business supporting the first year
experience in tertiary education. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Edu-
cation, 4(2), 1–14.
Zvobgo, R. J. (1994). Colonialism and education in Zimbabwe. Harare: SAPES Books.
APCEIU. (2012). Mission & mandate. Retrieved from www.unescoapceiu.org/en/m12.
php?pn=1&sn=2
APCEIU. (2016). Student empowerment through values in action (SEVA). Retrieved from www.
unescoapceiu.org/en/m411.php?pn=4&sn=1&sn2=1
APCEIU. (2017). The children film festival for peace. Retrieved from www.unescoapceiu.org/
board/bbs/board.php?bo_table=m4112&wr_id=92&page
APCEIU. Resources. (n.d.) Retrieved from www.unescoapceiu.org/en/m411.php?pn=
4&sn=1&sn2=1
Baildon, M., Sim, J., & Paculdar, A. (2016). A tale of two countries: Comparing civic
education in the Philippines and Singapore. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and
International Education, 46(1), 93–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2014.
940848
Bajaj, M., & Hantzopoulos, M. (Eds.). (2016). Peace education: International perspectives.
London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Chanbanchong, C., Thongthew S., Boonsombuti, S., & Sangnapaboworn, W. (2016).
Citizenship education and education for ASEANness in Thailand. In K. J. Kennedy, & A.
Brunold (Eds.). Regional contexts and citizenship education in Asia and Europe. Milton Park,
Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Cho, H. S. (2016). The gaps between values and practices of global citizenship education: A
critical analysis of global citizenship education in South Korea, Doctoral Dissertation. Retrieved
from http://scholarworks.umass.edudissertations_2/736
Chung, B. G., & Park, I. (2016). A review of the differences between ESD and GCED
in SDGs: Focusing on the concepts of global citizenship education. Journal of Interna-
tional Cooperation in Education, 18(2), 17–35.
Goh, M. (2012). Teaching with cultural intelligence: Developing multiculturally edu-
cated and globally engaged citizens. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(4), 395–415.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2012.738679
Ho, L. C. (2017). Freedom can only exist in an ordered state: Harmony and civic educa-
tion in Singapore. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(4), 476–496. https://doi.org/10.10
80/00220272.2016.1155648
Hong, C. (2013). Teacher training and whole school approach for improving teacher EIU competences.
Retrieved from www.unescoapceiu.org/en/m411.php?pn=4&sn=1&sn2=1
Jeong, B. (2017). Teachers’ perception on global citizenship education in ASEAN countries,
Master’s Thesis. Seoul National University. Retrieved from http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/
handle/10371/127245Lee, Y. (Ed.). (2017). Student voice in curriculum development. Retrieved
from www.unescoapceiu.org/board/bbs/board.php?bo_table=m4112&wr_id=94
Lim, C. P. (2008). Global citizenship education, school curriculum, and games: Learn-
ing Mathematics, English, and Science as a global citizen. Computers and Education,
50(3), 1073–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.005
Lockhart, A. S. (2016). Paper commissioned for the global education monitoring report 2016, educa-
tion for people and planet: Creating sustainable futures for all. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245625e.pdf
Ministry of Education Singapore. (2014). Character and citizenship education syllabus. Retrieved
from www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/character-citizenship-education
Moon, R. J., & Koo, J. (2011). Global citizenship and human rights: A longitudinal
analysis of social studies and ethics textbooks in the Republic of Korea. Comparative
Education Review, 55(4), 574–599.
SDG Goal 4. (n.d.) Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/themes/education2030-sdg4
SEVA. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/sites/default/files/
resources/EBP2016_India%20(No.41).pdf
Sim, J. (2008). What does citizenship mean? Social studies teachers’ understandings
of citizenship in Singapore schools. Educational Review, 60(3), 253–266. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00131910802195836
Sim, J., Chua, S., & Krishnasamy, M. (2017). “Riding the citizenship wagon”: Citizen-
ship conceptions of social studies teachers in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education,
63, 92–102.
Tan, C., & Tan, C. S. (2014). Fostering social cohesion and cultural sustainability: Char-
acter and citizenship education in Singapore. Diaspora, Indigenous and Minority Educa-
tion, 8(4), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/15595692.2014.952404
Torres, C. A., & Dorio, N. J. (2015). The do’s and don’ts of global citizenship education.
Adult Education & Development, 82, 4–7.
UNESCO. (1995–2016). Global education first initiative. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/
new/en/gefi/home/?
UNESCO. (2016a). The ABC’s of GCE. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0024/002482/248232e.pdf
UNESCO. (2016b). Global education monitoring report. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247430E.pdf
UNESCO. (2017). Sustainable development goal 4, sustainable development knowledge platform.
Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg
UNESCO. Clearinghouse. Retrieved from http://en.unesco.org/news/unesco-clearinghouse-
global-citizenship-education-hosted-apceiu
UNESCO. Global citizenship education—UNESCO’s approach. Retrieved from http://
en.unesco.org/gced/approach
UNESCO. Relationship between sustainable development goal 4 and the education 2030 frame-
work for action. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/culture/pdf/edu/SDG4-Ed2030-
relationship.pdf
Alviar-Martin, T., & Baildon, M. C. (2016a). Context and curriculum in two global cit-
ies: A study of discourses of citizenship in Hong Kong and Singapore. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 24(58), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.24.2140
Alviar-Martin, T., & Baildon, M. C. (2016b). Issues-centred global citizenship education
in Asia: Curricular challenges and possibilities in nation-centric and neoliberal times.
Curriculum Perspectives, 36(2), 65–75.
Alviar-Martin, T., & Ho, L. C. (2011). “So, where do they fit in?” Teachers’ perspectives
of multi-cultural education and diversity in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education,
27(1), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.07.009
Alviar-Martin, T., Randall, J., Usher, E., & Engelhard, G. (2008). Teaching civic topics
in four societies: Examining national context and teacher confidence. The Journal of
Educational Research, 101(3), 177–187.
Andreotti, V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy and Practice: A
Development Education Review, 3(4), 40–45.
Andreotti, V. (2011). Actionable postcolonial theory in education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ball, J., & Wangchuk, K. C. (2015). Using a policy of “Gross National Happiness” to
guide the development of sustainable early learning programs in the Kingdom of
Bhutan: Aspirations and challenges. Global Education Review, 2(1), 5–22.
Bengtsson, S. L. (2016). Hegemony and the politics of policy making for education for
sustainable development: A case study of Vietnam. Journal of Environmental Education,
47(2, SI), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1021291
Camicia, S. P., & Zhu, J. (2011). Citizenship education under discourses of nationalism,
globalization, and cosmopolitanism: Illustrations from China and the United States.
Frontiers of Education in China, 6(4), 602–619.
Chong, E. K. M. (2015). Global citizenship education and Hong Kong’s secondary
school curriculum guidelines responsibility to challenging inequality. Asian Education
and Development Studies, 4(2), 221–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-05-2014-0016
Choo, S. S. (2015). Citizenship education in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 35(2),
149–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2015.1048764
Dang, T. K. A., Nguyen, H. T. M., & Le, T. T. T. (2013). The impacts of globalization
on EFL teacher education through English as a medium of instruction: An example
from Vietnam. Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 52–72.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn
from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291–309.
Review, 58(1), 5–25.
Davis, K. A., Phyak, P., & Ngoc Bui, T. T. (2012). Multicultural education as community
engagement: Policies and planning in a transnational era. International Journal of Mul-
ticultural Education, 14(3), 1–25.
DeJaeghere, J., Wu, X., & Vu, L. (2015). Ethnicity and education in China and Viet-
nam: Discursive formations of inequality. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and Inter-
national Education, 45(1), 118–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2013.841034
Dill, J. (2013). The longings and limits of global citizenship education: The moral pedagogy of school-
ing in a cosmopolitan age. New York: Routledge.
Doan, D. H. (2005). Moral education or political education in the Vietnamese educa-
tional system? Journal of Moral Education, 34(4), 451–463.
Drupka, K., & Brien, K. (2010). Educating for Gross National Happiness: A new para-
digm for education in Bhutan. Antistasis, 3(2), 11–16.
Ferguson Patrick, K., MacQueen, S., & Reynolds, R. (2014). Pre-service teacher per-
spectives on the importance of global education: World and classroom views. Teachers
and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 20(4), 470–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.
2014.881639
Good afternoon Vietnam: Having attained middle-income status, Vietnam aims higher
(2016, August 6). The Economist. Retrieved from www.economist.com/news/finance-
and-economics/21703376-having-attained-middle-income-status-vietnam-aims-
higher-good-afternoon-vietnam
Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2017). Global citizenship education redefined: A systematic
review of empirical studies on global citizenship education. International Journal of
Educational Research, 82, 170–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.02.004
Grossman, D. L., Lee, W. O., & Kennedy, K. J. (Eds.). (2008). Citizenship curriculum in Asia
and the Pacific. Hong Kong, China: Comparative Education Research Centre, The
University of Hong Kong/Springer.
Gyamtso, D. C., Sherab, K., & Maxwell, T. W. (2017). Teacher learning in changing pro-
fessional contexts: Bhutanese teacher educators and the Educating for GNH initiative.
Cogent Education, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1384637
Ho, L. C. (2014). Meritocracy, tracking, and elitism: Differentiated citizenship educa-
tion in the United States and Singapore. The Social Studies, 105(1), 29–35.
Huu Ngoc (2016). Vietnam: Tradition and change. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.
Karsten, S., Cogan, J. J., Grossman, D. L., Liu, M.-H., & Pitiyanuwat, S. (2002). Citi-
zenship education and the reparation of future teachers: A study. Asia Pacific Education
Review, 3(2), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03024910
Larsen, M. A. (2016). Globalisation and internationalisation of teacher education: a
comparative case study of Canada and Greater China. Teaching Education, 27(4), 396–
409. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2016.1163331
Law, W. W. (2007). Globalization, city development and citizenship education in Chi-
na’s Shanghai. International Journal of Educational Development, 27(1), 18–38.
Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S., & Zeidler, D. (2012). Developing character and
values for global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers ’ moral reasoning
on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925–953.
Lee, W. O. (2008). Tensions and contentions in citizenship curriculum in Asia and the
Pacific. In D. L. Grossman, W. O. Lee, & K. J. Kennedy (Eds.), Citizenship curriculum
in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 215–231). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research
Center, University of Hong Kong/Springer.
Lee, W. O. (2012). Education for future-oriented citizenship: Implications for the edu-
cation of twenty-first century competencies. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(4),
498–517.
Leung, Y. W., & Lo, Y. L. (2017). Are Liberal Studies teachers ready to prepare human
rights respecting students? A portrait of teachers’ attitudes towards human rights.
Intercultural Education, 23(4), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2012.716725
Li, J. (2009). Fostering citizenship in China’s move from elite to mass higher educa-
tion: An analysis of students’ political socialization and civic participation. Interna-
tional Journal of Educational Development, 29(4), 382–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijedudev.2008.10.001
Lokamitra, D. (2004). The centrality of Buddhism and education in developing Gross
National Happiness. In K. Ura & K. Galay (Eds.), Gross national happiness and develop-
ment (pp. 472–482). Thimphu: The Centre for Bhutan Studies.
Marker, P. M. (1995). Vietnam’s emerging social studies curriculum. The Social Studies,
86(1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.1995.9956325
Mclean, L. R., & Truong-white, H. (2016). Toward self-authoring a civic teacher iden-
tity: Service-learning in teacher education. McGill Journal of Education, 51(3), 1–22.
Ministry of Education and Training [MOET]. (1990). Forty-five years of educational develop-
ment in Vietnam. Hanoi: Education Publishing House.
Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). (2017). Chương trình giáo dục phổ thông tổng
thể (Dự thảo) [The general curriculum for general education levels (Draft)]. Hanoi.
Moon, S. (2010). Multicultural and global citizenship in the transnational age: The case
of South Korea. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 12(1), 1–15.
Nguyen, H. T. M., & Bui, T. (2016, January). Teachers’ agency and the enactment of
educational reform in Vietnam. Current Issues in Language Planning, 4208, 1–18.
Nguyen, L. A. (2014). Integrating pedagogy into intercultural teaching in a Vietnamese
setting: From policy to the classroom. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning,
9(2), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.5172/ijpl.2014.9.2.171
Nguyen, L. A. (2017). Vietnam as a pioneer country in global citizenship education.
Global Commons Review, 1, 7–9.
Nguyen, T. M. H., & Hall, C. (2017). Changing views of teachers and teaching in
Vietnam. Teaching Education, 28(3), 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2016.
1252742
Nguyen, T. P. (2017). Environmental education for sustainable development in Vietnam:
Exploring the geography teachers’ perspectives Education for Sustainable Develop-
ment in Vietnam. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 27(4),
341–356.
Ong, A. (2006). Experiments with freedom: Milieus of the human. American Literary His-
tory, 18(2), 229–244.
Peeraer, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2011). ICT in teacher education in an emerging develop-
ing country: Vietnam’s baseline situation at the start of “The Year of ICT”. Computers
and Education, 56(4), 974–982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.015
Pellegrini, L., & Tasciotti, L. (2014). Bhutan: Between happiness and horror. Capitalism,
Nature, Socialism, 25(3), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2014.898673
Pham, L. H., & Fry, G. W. (2004). Education and economic, political, and social change
in Vietnam. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 3(3), 199–222.
Pham, T. H. T. (2006). The development of the higher education sector of Vietnam
within the globalization discourse: Using futures methodologies. Journal of Futures
Studies, 11(2), 35–60.
Prasad, B. D. (2008). Content analysis: A method in social science research. In D. K. Lal
Das & V. Bhaskaran (Eds.), Research methods for social work (pp. 173–193). New Delhi:
Rawat Presidential.
Presidential Committee on Education Reform. (1995). Education reform for establishing a
new education system leading globalization and informationization. Seoul: Author.
Prime Minister and Government of Vietnam (PM & GV). (2004). The strategic orienta-
tion for sustainable development in Vietnam (Vietnam Agenda 21) (No: 153/2004/QD-TTg).
Hanoi: National Political Publishing House.
Sakurai, R. (2011). Preserving national identity and fostering happiness in an era of
globalization: A comparative exploration of values and moral education in Bhutan
and Japan. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 14(2), 169–188.
Salomon, M., & Vu, D. K. (2007). “Doi Moi”, education and identity formation
in contemporary Vietnam. Compare, 37(3), 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/
03057920701330222
Sim, J. B. Y., Chua, S., & Krishnasamy, M. (2017). “Riding the citizenship wagon”:
Citizenship conceptions of social studies teachers in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 63, 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.12.002
So, K., Lee, S., Park, J., & Kang, J. (2014). The idea of cosmopolitanism in Korea’s
national curriculum. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34(1), 1–14.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2015).
Global citizenship education: Topics and learning objectives. Paris: UNESCO.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2016).
Preparing and supporting teachers in the Asia-Pacific to meet the challenges of twenty-first century
learning: Regional synthesis report. Bangkok: UNESCO.
VanBalkom, W. D., & Sherman, A. (2010). Teacher education in Bhutan: Highlights
and challenges for reform. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30(1), 43–55.
VanderDussen Toukan, E. (2017). Educating citizens of “the global”: Mapping textual
constructs of UNESCO’s global citizenship education 2012–2015. Education, Citizen-
ship and Social Justice, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197917700909
Vietnamese National Commission of the Decade on Education for Sustainable Devel-
opment (VNCDESD). (2010). National action plan for education for sustainable development
of Vietnam. Hanoi: Vietnamese Education Publishing House.
Wong, K. L., Lee, C. K. J., Chan, K. S. J., & Kennedy, K. J. (2017). Constructions
of civic education: Hong Kong teachers’ perceptions of moral, civic and national
education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 47(5), 628–646.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2016.1262756
Amnistía Internacional. (2012). Educación en Derechos Humanos en España. Algo más que una
assignatura. Sección española de Amnistía Internacional, Madrid.
Argibay, M., Celorio, G., Celorio, J. J., Garagalza, A., & Lopez De Munain, A. (2009).
Educación para la Ciudadanía Global. Debates y desafíos. Bilbao: Hegoa.
Bîrzéa, C., et al. (2004). All-European study on policies for education for democratic citizenship.
Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Council of Europe. (2008). White paper on intercultural dialogue: “Living together as equals in
dignity”. Strasbourg: Committee of Ministers. Council of Europe Publishing. Retrieved
from www.coe.int/t/dg4/intercultural/source/white%20paper_final_revised_en.pdf
Council of Europe. (2011). Living together: Combining diversity and freedom in 21st century
Europe. Report of the group of eminent persons of the council of Europe. Strasbourg: Council
of Europe Publishing. Retrieved from www.coe.int/t/dg4/highereducation/2011/
KYIV%20WEBSITE/Report%20on%20diversity.pdf
Council of Europe. (2016). Competences for democratic culture—Living together as equals in cul-
turally diverse democratic societies. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Retrieved
from www.coe.int/en/web/education/competences-for-democratic-culture
Council of Europe. (2017). Learning to live together: Council of Europe report on the state of citizenship and
human rights education in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Retrieved from
https://rm.coe.int/the-state-of-citizenship-in-europe-e-publication/168072b3cd
Eurydice. (2005). Citizenship education at school in Europe. Strasbourg: European Commis-
sion. Retrieved from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/
Eurydice. (2012). Citizenship education in Europe. Strasbourg: European Commission.
Retrieved August 2017 from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/EURYDICE/
documents/thematic_reports/139EN.pdf
Fundación CIVES. (2015.) Proyecto ENGAGE. Creación de un currículo europeo universal de
Educación para la Ciudadanía. UE. Erasmus.
Giroux, H. A. (1990). Los profesores como intelectuales. Hacia una pedagogia crítica del aprendizaje.
Barcelona: Paidós/MEC.
Intermón/Oxfam. (2009). Pistas para cambiar la escuela. Retrieved from www.kaidara.org/
upload/267/Pistas_Interactiu.pdf
Ley Orgánica 8/2013, de 9 de diciembrem para la mejora de la calidad educative
(LOMCE), BOE nº 295, de 10 de diciembre de 2013, called the Wert Act by name
of the Minister if Education.
Ministérios dos Negócios Estrangeiros e da Educaçâo. (2009). Estratégia Nacional
de Educaçâo para o Desenvolvimiento (2010–2015). Diário da República, 2.ª série—
N.º 230–26 de Novembro de 2009, 48391–48402. https://dre.pt/application/file/
a/2003945
Pagès, J., Pujol, R. Mª., Roig, A. Mª., Sala, C., & Tacher, P. (1981). L’Educació Cívica a
l’Escola. Barcelona: Edicions 62/Rosa Sensat. Edición en español, 1984. Barcelona,
Paidós.
República Portuguesa. (2017). Estratégia Nacional de Educaçâo para a Cidadania. Retrieved
from www.portugal.gov.pt/download-ficheiros/ficheiro.aspx?v=f95a1095-79fc-4d8a-
8f34-13e3a98bea68
Santisteban, A., Pagès, J., & Bravo, L. (2017). History education and global citizen-
ship education. In I. Davies, L-.C. Ho, D. Kiwan, C. Peck, A. Peterson, E. Sant, &
Y. Waghid (Eds.), Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education. London: Palgrave
Macmillan. (En prensa).
Torres, A., Figueirido, I., Cardoso, J., Pereira, L. T., Neves, M. J., & Silva, R. Referencial
de Educação para o Desenvolvimento—Educação Pré-Escolar, Ensino Básico e Ensino Secundário.
Ed. Ministério da Educaçâo. Récupéré de www.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/
ECidadania/educacao_desenvolvimento/Documentos/referencial_de_educacao_
para_o_desenvolvimento.pdf
Abdi, A. A., Shultz, L., & Pillay, T. (2015). Decolonizing global citizenship education. Rotter-
dam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Allemann-Ghionda, C. (2009). From intercultural education to the inclusion of diver-
sity: Theories and policies in Europe. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), The Routledge international
companion to multicultural education. New York and London: Routledge.
Andreotti , V. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Policy & Practice: A
Development Education Review, 3(Autumn), 40–51.
Andreotti, V. (2010). Postcolonial and post-critical global citizenship education. In G.
Elliott, C. Fourali, & S. Issler, (Eds.) Education and social change (pp. 223–245). London:
Continuum.
Andreotti, V. (2011a). (Towards) decoloniality and diversality in global citizenship edu-
cation. Globalization, Societies and Education, 9(3–4), 381–397.
Andreotti, V. (2011b). Actionable postcolonial theory. New York: Palgrave.
Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education
Policy, 18(2), 215–228.
Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. London:
Routledge.
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2017). The role of beliefs in teacher agency.
Teachers and Teaching. Theory and Practice, 21(6), 624–640.
Bourn, D. (2015). The theory and practice of development education: A pedagogy for global social
justice. London and New York: Routledge.
Bourn, D., Hunt, F., & Bamber, P. (2017). Review for SDE and GCE in teacher education.
Background paper for UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report.
Bracken, M., & Bryan, A. (2010). The reflective practitioner model as a means of
evaluating development education practice: Post-primary teachers’ self-reflections
on “doing” development education. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review,
11(Autumn,) 22–41.
Bryan, A., Clarke, M., & Drudy, S. (2009). Social justice education in initial teacher education:
A cross border perspective. A report for the Standing Conference on Teacher Education
North and South. SCoTENS.
Castells, M. (2008). The new public sphere: Global civil society, communication net-
works, and global governance. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, 616(1), 78–93.
Concord. (2018). Global citizenship education in Europe. How much do we care? Brussels:
Concord Europe. Retrieved from https://concordeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/
2018/03/CONCORD_GCE_FundingReport_2018_online.pdf ?56c6d0&56c6d031/
10/2018
Council of Europe (CoE)—North South Centre. (1997). The global education charter.
Retrieved 2017, November 18 from https://rm.coe.int/global-education-charter-by-
dakmara-georgescu-institute-for-educationa/168070f05d
Davies, I., Gregory, I., & Riley, S. C. (1999). Good citizenship and educational provision.
London and New York: Falmer Press.
Review, 58(1), 5–25.
Dillon, S., & O’Shea, M. (2009). From the college to the classroom: The impact of DICE courses
on the inclusion of development education and intercultural education in the primary classroom.
Dublin: DICE.
Dower, N. (2003). An introduction to global citizenship. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press.
Forghani-Arani, N., Hartmeyer, H., O’Loughlin, E., & Wegimont, L. (2013). Global edu-
cation in Europe: Policy, practice and theoretical challenges. Münster: Waxmann Verlag.
Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretative theory of culture. In The
interpretation of cultures (pp. 3–32). New York: Basic Book.
GENE. (2017). The state of global education in Europe 2017. Global Education Network
Europe. Retrieved 2018, October 31 from http://gene.eu/wp-content/uploads/
State-of-Global-Education-2018-with-cover.pdf
Gleeson, J., King, P., O’Driscoll, S., & Tormey, R. (2007). Development education in Irish
post-primary schools: Knowledge, attitudes and activism. Retrieved 2018, October 31 from
www.ubuntu.ie/media/report-2007-gleeson.pdf
Goren, H., & Yemini, M. (2017). Citizenship education redefined: A systematic review
of empirical studies on global citizenship education. International Journal of Educational
Research, 82, 170–183.
Hartung, C. (2017). Global citizenship incorporated: Competing responsibilities in the
education of global citizens. Discourse, 38(1), 16–29.
Heater, D. (2002). World citizenship: Cosmopolitan thinking and its opponents. London: Continuum.
Jefferess, D. (2008). Global citizenship and the cultural politics of benevolence. Critical
Literacy: Theories and Practices, 2(1), 27–36.
Kaldor, M. (2003). Global civil society: An answer to war. Cambridge: Polity Press.
McCormack, O., & O’Flaherty, J. (2010). An examination of pre-service teachers’
attitudes towards the inclusion of development education into Irish post-primary
schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(6), 1332–1339.
Niens, U., O’Connor, U., & Smith, A. (2013). Citizenship education in divided societ-
ies: Teachers’ perspectives in Northern Ireland. Citizenship Studies, 17(1), 128–141.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2012.716214
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (1988). Global teacher, global learner. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. London:
Bloomsbury.
Priestley, M., Edwards, R., Priestley, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher agency in cur-
riculum making: Agents of change and spaces for manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42,
191–214.
Pyhältö, K., Pietarinen, J., & Soini, T. (2014). Comprehensive school teachers’ profes-
sional agency in large-scale educational change. Journal of Educational Change, 15(3),
303–325.
Robbins, M., Francis, L., & Elliott, E. (2003). Attitudes toward education for global
citizenship among trainee teachers. Research in Education, 69(1), 93–98.
Schattle, H. (2009). Global citizenship in theory and practice. In R. Lewin (Ed.), The
handbook of practice and research in study abroad: Higher education and the quest for global citizen-
ship (pp. 3–20). New York: Routledge.
Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1999). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches
to race, class, and gender (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Steiner, M. (1992). World studies 8–13: Evaluating active learning. Manchester: Manchester
Metropolitan University, World Studies Trust.
Tarozzi, M., & Inguaggiato, C. (2018). Implementing global citizenship education in
EU primary schools : The role of government ministries. International Journal of Devel-
opment Education and Global Learning, 10(1), 21–38.
Tarozzi, M., & Inguaggiato, C. (Eds.). (2019). Teachers’ education in GCE: Emerging issues in
a comparative perspective. Bologna: Università di Bologna repository.
Tarozzi, M., & Mallon, B. (2019). Educating teachers towards global citizenship: A com-
parative study in four European countries. London Review of Education, 17(2), 112–125.
Tarozzi, M., & Torres, C. A. (2016). Global citizenship education and the crises of multicultural-
ism: Comparative perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.
Torres, C. A. (2017). Theoretical and empirical foundations of critical global citizenship education.
UN. (2012). Global education first initiative. Retrieved from www.globaleducationfirst.org
UNESCO. (2014). Global citizenship education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st cen-
tury. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO. (2015) Global Citizenship Education: Topics and learning objectives. Paris: UNESCO.
Vongalis-Macrow, A. (2007). I, teacher: Re-territorialization of teachers’ multi-faceted
agency in globalized education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(4), 425–439.
Westbrook, J., Durrani, N., Brown, R., Orr, D., Pryor, J., Boddy, J., & Salvi, F. (2013). Ped-
agogy, curriculum, teaching practices and teacher education in developing countries. Final Report.
Education Rigorous Literature Review. Department for International Development.
Wintersteiner, W., Grobbauer, H., Diendorfer, G., & Reitmair-Juárez, S. (2015). Global
citizenship education: Citizenship education for globalizing societies. Klagenfurt, Salzburg,
Vienna. Retrieved 2018, October 31 from www.demokratiezentrum.org/fileadmin/
media/pdf/Materialien/GlobalCitizenshipEducation_Final_english.pdf
Abdi, A. A., & Shultz, L. (Eds.). (2008). Educating for human rights and global citizen-
ship: An introduction. In A. Abdi & L. Shultz (Eds.), Educating for human rights and global
citizenship (pp. 1–10). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Abdi, A. A., Shultz, L., & Pillay, T. (Eds.). (2015). Decolonizing global citizenship education.
Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Agbaria, A. K. (2011). The social studies education discourse community on globaliza-
tion: Exploring the agenda of preparing citizens for the global age. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 15(1), 57–74.
Andreotti, V., & Souza, M. (Eds.). (2012). Postcolonial perspectives on global citizenship educa-
tion (pp. 1–6). New York: Routledge.
Andreotti, V., Stein, S., Ahenakew, C., & Hunt, D. (2015). Mapping interpretations of
decolonization in the context of higher education. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Educa-
tion & Society, 4(1), 21–40.
Education, 7(2).
Association of Canadian Deans of Education. (2014). Accord on the internationalization of
education. Retrieved from www.csse-scee.ca/docs/acde/Accord_Internationalization_
EN.pdf
Banks, J. (Ed.). (2004). Diversity and citizenship education: Global perspectives. San Francisco,
CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Brandenburg, U., & de Wit, H. (2011). The end of internationalization. International
Higher Education 62(Winter): 15–17.
Cushner, K., & Brennan, S. (Eds.). (2007). Intercultural student teaching: A bridge to global
competence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cushner, K., & Mahon, J. (2002). Overseas student teaching: Affecting personal, pro-
fessional, and global competencies in an age of globalization. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 6(1), 44–58.
Day, M. (2012). Engaging teachers in building relationships with international families.
In B. Shaklee & S. Bailey (Eds.), Internationalizing teacher education in the US (pp. 115–
137). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Delanty, G. (2000). Citizenship in a global age: Society, culture, politics. Philadelphia, PA: Open
University Press.
Easton, D. (1953). The political system: An inquiry into the state of political science. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf.
Eidoo, S., Ingram, L., MacDonald, A., Nabavi, M., Pashby, K., & Stille, S. (2011).
Through the kaleidoscope: Intersections between theoretical perspectives and class-
room implications in critical global citizenship education. Canadian Journal of Educa-
tion, 34(4), 59–84.
Engel, L. C. (2014). Citizenship education and national (re)formations: Reflections from
Spain. Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice, 9(3), 239–254.
Engel, L. C., Fundalinski, J., & Cannon, T. (2016). Global citizenship education at a
local level: A comparative analysis of four U.S. urban districts. Revista de Educación
Comparativa Espanola [Journal of Spanish Comparative Education], 28, 23–51.
Engel, L. C., & Siczek, M. (2017). A cross-national comparison of international strate-
gies: National competitiveness or global citizenship? Compare: A Journal of Comparative
Education, 48(5), 749–767.
Evans, M., Ingram, L. A., Macdonald, A., & Weber, N. (2009). Mapping the “global
dimension” of citizenship education in Canada: The complex interplay of theory,
practice and context. Citizenship Teaching and Learning, 5(2), 17–34.
Guo, L. (2014). Preparing teachers to educate for 21st century global citizenship:
Envisioning and enacting. Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education, 4(1), 1–23.
Retrieved from http://journals.sfu.ca/jgcee/index.php/jgcee/article/viewArticle/
121/168
Haapakoski, J., & Pashby, K. (2017). Implications for equity and diversity of increasing
international student numbers in European universities: Policies and practice in four
national contexts. Policy Futures in Education, 15(3), 360–379.
Haapakoski, J., & Stein, S. (2018). The ethical implications of internationalisation for a
knowledge economy: A critical discourse analysis approach to contemporary strate-
gies in Finland and Canada. In V. Korhonen & P. Alenius (Eds.), Internationalisation and
transnationalisation in vocational and tertiary education (pp. 42–67). New York: Peter Lang.
Institute of International Education. (2016). Open doors 2016: Data [web page]. Retrieved
from www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data
Jorgenson, S., & Shultz, L. (2012). Global Citizenship Education (GCE) in Post-Second-
ary Institutions: What is protected and what is hidden under the umbrella of GCE?.
Journal of Global Citizenship & Equity Education, 2(1).
Joshee, R. (2004). Citizenship and multicultural education in Canada: From assimila-
tion to social cohesion. In J. A. Banks (Ed.), Diversity and citizenship education: Global
perspectives (pp. 127–156). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Kambutu, J., & Nganga, L. W. (2008). In these uncertain times: Educators build cultural
awareness through planned international experiences. Teaching and Teacher Education,
24(4), 939–951.
Kolar, N. (2012). A comparison of K-12 multicultural and international education in
the United States. In B. Shaklee & S. Bailey (Eds.), Internationalizing teacher education in
the US. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Larsen, M. A. (2016). Globalization and internationalisation of teacher education:
A comparative case study of Canada and Greater China. Teaching Education, 27(4),
396–409.
Longview Foundation. (2008). Teacher preparation for the global age: The imperative for change.
Silver Spring, MD: Author.
Luig, T., Ballantyne, E. F., & Scott, K. K. (2011). Promoting well-being through land-
based pedagogy. International Journal of Health, Wellness and Society, 1(3): 13–26.
MacDonald-Vemic, A., Evans, M., Ingram, L., & Weber, N. (2015). A question of how:
A report on teachers’ instructional practices when educating for global citizenship in
Canada. In J. Harshman, T. Augustine, & M. Merryfield (Eds.), Research on global citi-
zenship education (pp. 83–118). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Research
in Social Education Series.
Societies and Education, 9, 443–456.
Marshall, H. (2009). Educating the European citizen in the global age: Engaging with
the postnational and identifying a research agenda. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(2),
247–267.
Marshall, H. (2011). Instrumentalism, ideals and imaginaries: Theorising the contested
space of global citizenship education in schools. Globalization, Societies and Education,
9(3–4), 411–426.
Marx, H., & Moss, D. (2011). Please mind the culture gap: Intercultural development
during teacher education study abroad program. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(1),
35–47.
Merryfield, M. M. (1996). Making connections between multicultural and global education: Teacher
educators and teacher education programs. Washington, DC: American Association of Col-
leges for Teacher Education.
Merryfield, M. M. (2000). Why aren’t teachers being prepared to teach for diversity,
equity, and global interconnectedness? A study of lived experiences in the making
of multicultural and global educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(4), 429–443.
Mitchell, K. (2003). Educating the national citizen in neoliberal times: From the multi-
cultural self to the strategic cosmopolitan. Transactions of the Institute of British Geogra-
phers, 28, 387–403.
Montemurro, D., Gambhir, D., Evans, M., & Broad, K. (2014). Inquiry into practice: Teach-
ing global matters in local classrooms. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the
University of Toronto (OISE). Retrieved from www.oise.utoronto.ca/oise/UserFiles/
File/TEACHING_GLOBAL_MATTERS_FINAL_ONLINE.pdf
Mundy, K., & Manion, C. (2008). Global education in Canadian elementary schools:
An exploratory study. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 941–974.
Myers, J. (2006). Rethinking the social studies curriculum in the context of globaliza-
tion: Education for global citizenship in the U.S. Theory and Research in Social Education,
34(3), 370–394.
Ortloff, D. H., & Shonia, O. (2015). Teacher conceptualizations of global citizenship:
Global immersion experiences and implications for the empathy/threat dialectic. In
B. Maguth & J. Hilburn (Eds.), The state of global education: Learning with the world and its
people (pp. 78–91). London: Routledge.
O’Sullivan, M., & Pashby, K. (Eds.). (2008). Citizenship education in the era of globalization:
Canadian perspectives. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishing.
Parker, W. (2011). “International education” in U.S. public schools. Globalization, Societies
and Education, 9(3–4), 487–501.
Pashby, K. (2013). Related and conflated: A theoretical and discursive framing of multicul-
turalism and global citizenship education in the Canadian context. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation. Canada: University of Toronto. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.
net/1807/35921
Pashby, K. (2015). Conflations, possibilities, and foreclosures: Global citizenship educa-
tion in a multicultural context. Curriculum Inquiry, 45(4), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.
1080/03626784.2015.106430
Pashby, K., & Andreotti, V. (2015). Critical global citizenship in theory and practice:
Rationales and approaches for an emerging agenda. In J. Harshman, T. Augustine, &
M. Merryfield (Eds.), Research on global citizenship education (pp. 9–23). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishing, Research in Social Education Series.
Pashby, K., Taylor, L., & Tarc, P. (2016, July 29). Ethical internationalization in higher educa-
tion: Implications of a large-scale study for teacher education pedagogy. Presented at Interna-
tionalizing Higher Education Conference. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC.
Peck, C., & Pashby, K. (2018). Global Citizenship Education in North America. In
I. Davies, L. Ho, D. Kiwan, C. Peck, A. Peterson, E. Sant, & Y. Waghid (Eds.), The
Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education. London: Palgrave.
Pike, G. (2008). Reconstructing the legend: Educating for global citizenship. In A.
Abdi & L. Shultz (Eds.), Educating for human rights and global citizenship (pp. 223–237).
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
studies standards. Journal of Social Studies Research, 33(1), 91–112.
Reimer, K., & McLean, L. R. (2009). Conceptual clarity and connections: Global edu-
cation and teacher candidates. Canadian Journal of Education, 32(4), 903.
Richardson, G. (2008). Conflicting imaginaries: Global citizenship education in Canada
as a site of contestation. In M. O’Sullivan & K. Pashby (Eds.), Citizenship education in
the era of globalization: Canadian perspectives (pp. 53–70). Rotterdam, The Netherlands:
Sense.
Roberts, A. (2007). Global dimensions of schooling: Implications for internationalizing
teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 9–26.
Schneider, A. I. (2007). To leave no teacher behind: Building international competence into the under-
graduate training of K-12 Teachers. A Research Report. Washington, DC.
Shaklee, B., & Baily, S. (Eds.). (2012). Internationalizing teacher education in the US. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Siczek, M., & Engel, L. C. (2017). Teachers’ cognitive interpretations of U.S. global
education policy. Educational Policy, 33(3), 486–515.
St Denis, N., & Walsh, C. (2016). Reclaiming my Indigenous identity and the emerging
warrior: An autoethnography. Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 5, 1–17.
Stein, S. (2017). The persistent challenges of addressing epistemic dominance in higher
education: Considering the case of curriculum internationalization. Comparative Edu-
cation Review, 61(S1), S25–S50.
Taylor, L. (2012). Beyond paternalism: Global education with preservice teachers as a
practice of implication. In V. Andreotti & M. Souza (Eds.), Postcolonial perspectives on
global citizenship education (pp. 177–199). New York: Routledge.
Torres, C. A. (2015). Solidarity and competitiveness in a global context: Comparable
concepts in global citizenship education? The International Education Journal: Comparative
Perspectives, 14(2), 22–29.
Trilokekar, R. D., & Kukar, P. (2011). Disorienting experiences during study abroad:
Reflections of pre-service teacher candidates. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(7),
1141–1150.
Truong-White, H., & McLean, L. (2015). Digital storytelling for transformative global
citizenship education. Canadian Journal of Education, 38, 1–28.
Tully, J. (2000). The challenge of reimagining citizenship and belonging in multicul-
tural and multinational societies. In C. McKinnon & I. Hampsher-Monk (Eds.), The
demands of citizenship (pp. 212–234). London: Continuum.
US Department of Education. (2012). Succeeding globally through international education and
engagement. Washington, DC: Author.
US Department of Education. (2017). Framework for developing global and cultural competen-
cies to advance equity, excellence and economic competitiveness. Washington, DC: Author.
White, C., & Openshaw, R. (Eds.). (2005). Democracy at the crossroads: International perspec-
tives on critical global citizenship education. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Zeichner, K. (2010). Preparing globally competent teachers: A US perspective. 2010
Colloquium on the Internationalization of Teacher Education. NAFSA: Association
of International Educators. Retrieved from www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/zeichner_collo
quium_paper.pdf
Zhao, Y. (2010). Preparing globally competent teachers: A new imperative for teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 422–431.
Bascopé, M., Cox, C., & Lira, R. (2015). Tipos de ciudadano en los currículos del
autoritarismo y la democracia. In C. Cox y J. Castillo (Eds.), Aprendizaje de la ciudada-
nía. Contextos, experiencias y resultados (pp. 245–282). Santiago: Ediciones Universidad
Católica.
Cerda, A., Egaña, M., Magendzo, A., Santa Cruz, E., & Varas, R. (2004). El complejo
camino de la formación ciudadana. Una mirada a las prácticas docentes. Santiago: LOM.
Congreso de la República de Colombia. (1994). Ley 115 de Febrero de 1994 por la cual se
expide la ley general de educación (pp. 2 and 4). Retrieved from www.mineducacion.gov.
co/1621/articles-85906_archivo_pdf.pdf
Cox, C., Bascopé, M., Castillo, J. C., Miranda, D., & Bonhome, M. (2015). Educación
ciudadana en América Latina: prioridad de los currículos escolares. In C. Cox y J. C.
Castillo (Eds.), Aprendizaje de la ciudadanía. Contextos, experiencias y resultados (pp. 321–
371). Santiago: Ediciones Universidad Católica de Chile.
Freire, P. (1995). À sobra desta mangueira. Sâo Paulo: Olho d’Água.
García, C., & Cox, C. (2015). Objetivos y contenidos de la Formación Ciudadana esco-
lar en Chile 1996–2013: tres currículos comparados. In C. Cox & J. Castillo (Eds.),
Aprendizaje de la ciudadanía. Contextos, experiencias y resultados (pp. 283–320). Santiago:
Ediciones Universidad Católica de Chile.
Magendzo, A., & Arias, R. A. (2015). Informe Regional 2015. Educación ciudadana y formación
docente en países de América Latina. SREDECC/PADCCEAL. Editorial Gente Nueva.
Retrieved from http://sredecc.com/sites/default/files/Documentos/informe-regional-
2015-web.pdf
MINEDUC. (2012). Bases curriculares Educación Básica. Santiago: Ministerio de Edu-
cación. Récupéré de www.curriculumenlineamineduc.cl/605/articles-30013_recurso_
14.pdf
Ministério da Educaçâo. (1998a). Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais. Temas Transversais—
Apresentação. Retrieved 2017, July 2 from http://portal.mec.gov.br/seb/arquivos/
pdf/pluralidade.pdf
Ministério da Educação. (1998b). Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais-Meio Ambiente. Récu-
péré 2017, July 2 de http://portal.mec.gov.br/seb/arquivos/pdf/meioambiente.pdf
Ministério da Educação. (2001). Proposta de Diretrizes para a Formação Inicial de Professores da
Educação Básica, em Cursos de Nível Superior. Récupéré 2017, July 3 de http://portal.mec.
gov.br/cne/arquivos/pdf/basica.pdf
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2004). Guía 6. Estándares básicos de competencias ciu-
dadanas (IPSA). Bogotá.
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2011). Orientaciones para la institucionalización de las
competencias ciudadanas. Brujula 1. Bogota: Amado Impresores S.A.S.
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2016). Derechos Básicos de Aprendizaje. Ciencias Socia-
les. Bogotá. Retrieved from www.slideshare.net/sbmalambo/derechos-bsicos-de-
aprendizaje-de-sociales-dba-ciencias-sociales
Muñoz, C. (2010). El estudiantado y la formación ciudadana en la escuela. Una aproxi-
mación a partir de métodos cuantitativos y cualitativos de investigación. En R. Ávila,
M. Rivero, & P. Domínguez (Eds.), Metodología de investigación en Didáctica de las Ciencias
Sociales (pp. 129–137). Zaragoza: Institución Fernando el Católico.
Ossandón, L., Aguila, E., y Carrasco, A. (2016). Desafíos y brechas en formación ciu-
dadana: relato de una experiencia con profesores. En Revista Docencia, 58, 60–71.
Pinochet, S., y Mercado, J. (2017). Reflexiones en torno a la implementación del plan de formación
ciudadana en la región de Antofagasta: perspectivas desde los equipos responsables. Ponencia XV
Seminario de Didáctica de la Historia, Geografía y Ciencias Sociales. Pontificia Uni-
versidad Católica de Valparaíso.
Quiroz Posada, R. H., & Gómez Nashiki, A. (2011). Formación ciudadana: una mirada desde
Colombia y México. Universidad de Antioquia.
Sant, E., & González-Valencia, G. (2017). Global citizenship education in Latin Amer-
ica. In I. Davies, L. Ho, D. Kiwan, C. Peck, A. Peterson, E. Sant, & Y. Waghid (Eds.),
The Palgrave handbook of global citizenship and education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
UNESCO. (2017). La Formación Inicial Docentes en Educación para la Ciudadanía en América
Latina. Análisis comparado de seis casos nacionales, Centro de Estudios de Políticas y Prác-
ticas en Educación, Oficina Regional de Educación para América Latina y el Caribe
(OREALC/UNESCO Santiago.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2016). The
Australian curriculum V8.3. Sydney: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2017). Civics
and citizenship. Sydney: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Author-
ity. Retrieved from www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/GeneralCapabilities/Pdf/
Intercultural-understanding
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL]. (2015). Australian pro-
fessional standards for teachers. Retrieved from www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-
standards-for-teachers/standards/list
Casinader, N. (2016a). A lost conduit for intercultural education: School geography and
the potential for transformation in the Australian Curriculum. Intercultural Education,
27(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2016.1150650
Casinader, N. (2016b). Transnationalism in the Australian Curriculum: New horizons
or destinations of the past? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(3),
327–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1023701
Casinader, N. (2017). Transnationalism, education and empowerment: The latent legacies of empire.
Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.
Education Council New Zealand. (2015). Graduating teacher standards: Aoteoroa New Zealand.
Wellington: Education Council New Zealand.
Faculty of Education, Monash University. (2017). Our vision and strategy. Retrieved from
www.monash.edu/education/about/vision
Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Auckland. (2017). Programme
handbook 2017: Initial teacher education—Graduate diplomain teaching (Secondary). Auckland:
Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Auckland.
Fitoo, B. (2017, September 6). [personal communication with author, GCE in Fiji].
Giddens, A. (2003). Runaway world. New York: Routledge.
Hartung, C. (2017). Global citizenship incorporated: Competing responsibilities in the
education of global citizens. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 38(1),
16–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1104849
Henderson, D. (2015). Exploring the potential to educate “good citizens” through the
Australian civics and citizenship curriculum. In M. Print & Tan Chuanbuao (Eds.),
Educating “good citizens” in a globalising world for the twenty-first century (pp. 11–31). Rot-
terdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Hughes, A. S., Print, M., & Sears, A. (2010). Curriculum capacity and citizenship educa-
tion: A comparative analysis of four democracies. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and
International Education, 40(3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920903395528
Kidman, G., & Casinader, N. (2017). Inquiry-based teaching and learning across disciplines:
Comparative theory and practice in schools. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Lingam, G. I. (2004). Teacher preparation for the world of work: A study of pre—service primary
teacher education in Fiji, PhD. Thesis. Griffith University, Queensland Australia.
Lingam, G. I., Lingam, N., & Sharma, L. (2017). Educational reforms and implications
on teachers’ world of work: Perspectives of Fijian primary teachers. Australian Journal
of Education, 42(1), 19–35.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008).
Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Carlton South: MCEETYA.
Ministry of Education New Zealand. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington:
Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education, Republic of the Fiji Islands. (2007). The Fiji Islands National Cur-
riculum Framework: Education for a better future. Suva.
Ministry of Education Republic of the Fiji Islands. (2014). Global citizenship education
working group: Draft terms of reference. Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0, Global Citizen-
ship Education Working Group, Fiji.
Ministry of Education Republic of the Fiji Islands. (2016). Global citizenship education
working group: Updated working group guidelines. Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0, Global
Citizenship Education Working Group, Fiji.
Ministry of Education, Republic of Vanuatu. (2010a). Pacific-German regional programme on
adaptation to climate change in the Pacific Island Region: Climate change curriculum in the formal
education sector. Port Vila: Ministry of Education, Republic of Vanuatu.
Ministry of Education, Republic of Vanuatu. (2010b). Vanuatu national curriculum state-
ment. Port Vila: Ministry of Education, Republic of Vanuatu.
Minvielle, S. (2017, August 24). [personal communication with author, Notes on GCE
in New Caledonia].
Monash University. (2017a). Aligning course outcomes educational standards frameworks. Retrieved
from https://monash.edu/pubs/2017handbooks/alignmentofoutcomes.html
Monash University. (2017b). Faculty of education: Become a teacher. Retrieved from www.
monash.edu/education/future-students/courses/teacher-education
Pennington, B., Ireland, N., & Narsey, W. (2010). Fiji education sector program: Aidworks
Number: INF528 independent completion report. Retrieved from https://www.dfat.gov.au/
sites/default/files/fiji-fesp.pdf
Peters, M. A., Britton, A., & Blee, H. (2008). Many faces of global civil society: Possible
futures for global citizenship. In M. A. Peters, A. Britton, & H. Blee (Eds.), Global
citizenship education: Philosophy, theory and pedagogy (pp. 1–14). Rotterdam, Netherlands:
Sense.
Peterson, A. (2015). Civic virtue and global responsibilities: The possibility of a
character-based approach to abdicating global citizens in Australia. In M. Print &
T. Chuanbuao (Eds.), Educating “good citizens” in a globalising world for the twenty-first century
(pp. 49–64). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
Puamua, P. (2007). Teacher education in the Pacific: Issues and challenges Commonwealth education
partnerships. Commonwealth Education Online. Retrieved from http://www.cedol.
org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/82-84-2007.pdf
Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group. (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teach-
ers. Canberra: Commonwealth Government of Australia.
Tudball, L. (2017). Theoretical perspectives and pedagogical possibilities in the new
civics and citizenship curriculum. In A. Peterson & L. Tudball (Eds.), Civics and citi-
zenship in Australia: Challenges, practices and international perspectives (pp. 23–40). London:
Bloomsbury.
Tully, J. (2008). Two meanings of global citizenship: Modern and Diverse. In M. A.
Peters, A. Britton, & H. Blee (Eds.), Global citizenship education: Philosophy, theory and
pedagogy (pp. 15–39). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
UNESCO. (2017). The four pillars of learning. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/new/
en/education/networks/global-networks/aspnet/about-us/strategy/the-four-pillars-
of-learning/
The University of Auckland. (2017). Faculty of education and social work: Teacher education.
Retrieved from www.education.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/programmes/teacher-
education.html
University of Canterbury. (2017). School of teacher education. Retrieved from www.canterbury.
ac.nz/education/schools-and-departments/school-of-teacher-education/
University of Otago. (2017). College of education-undergraduate and graduate study. Retrieved
from www.otago.ac.nz/education/undergraduate/
University of the South Pacific, University of Bristol, & University of Nottingham. (2016).
Quality teachers and teacher education in Fiji: Identities, challenges & priorities. Retrieved from
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/education/documents/policy-brief.pdf
The University of Waikato. (2017). Education. Retrieved from https://papers.waikato.
ac.nz/subjects/EDUCA
The University of Western Australia. (2017). Graduate school of education: Future teachers.
Retrieved from www.education.uwa.edu.au/courses
Walsh, L. (2017). The needs and challenges for global citizenship education. In A. Peter-
son & L. Tudball (Eds.), Civics and citizenship in Australia: Challenges, practices and interna-
tional perspectives (pp. 101–118). London: Bloomsbury.

Previewpdf

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Previewpdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Citizenship Education

and Teacher Education

Daniel Schugurensky is Professor of Justice and Social Inquiry and Director

Charl Wolhuter is Comparative and International Education Professor at

Edited by Daniel Schugurensky

ISBN: 978-0-815-35548-9 (hbk)

List of Contributors viii

Teachers’ Education and Global Citizenship

1 Different Views on Global Citizenship Education:

2 Critical Global Citizenship Education in Canada,

3 The Struggle for ‘Thick’ or Transformative

4 Citizenship Education Beyond the Nation State:

5 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education:

7 Global Citizenship Education and Teacher Education

8 Global Citizenship Education in East, South,

9 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education

10 Global Citizenship Education and Teacher Education

11 Exploring Global Citizenship in Teacher Education

12 Global Citizenship Education in Teacher Education

13 Teacher Education and Global Citizenship Education

Jennifer K. Bergen is a PhD candidate at the University of Ottawa, and

Niranjan Casinader is Senior Lecturer (Curriculum and Assessment) in the

Sharon A. Cook is Distinguished University Professor and Professor Emerita

The moral qualities of dialogue or deliberation account for yet another

The Sustainable Development Goals and Global

Article 26.2: Education shall be directed to the full development of the

Evaluating Progress on Target 4.7: The Four Areas

Teacher Education and Global Citizenship Education

Part I (Chapters 1–6)

Part II (Chapters 7–14)

You might also like