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

Abstract

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

Professional Development Workshop on Global Citizenship Education Experiences of University Teachers

“…The approach to integrate GCE in educational and training institutions may be influenced by the perspective of GCE. There are four different perspectives to adopt and practise GCE, as mentioned by Franch (2020b): neo-liberal human capitalism, cosmopolitan humanism, social-justice activism and critical citizenship education practice. Neo-liberal human capitalism perspective of GCE emphasize the development of knowledge and skills of individuals so they can contribute in the productivity and global competitiveness of the economy of their country (Sant, et al, 2018: as cited in Franch, 2020b.…”

Whole-of-Nation Moral Learning by Spiritual Hearts: A Case of Brunei’s Transformation to tackle the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…These concepts also examine the stock and flow of knowledge but have broader scope beyond the organizational and national boundaries. Since the concern here is on moral learning, some similar concepts are readily available, such as global citizenship (Huckle, 2020) and global citizenship education (Franch, 2020 ). However, depending on the authors, they may have their respective ontological and epistemological assumptions.…”

Education on the Sustainable Development Goals for nursing students: Is Freire the answer?

“…Supporting Freire's argument on siding with the powerful, scholars from a School of Nursing in the United States undertook a project addressing whiteness in nursing education and warned “to not address racism is to actively collude with racism” (Schroeder & Diangelo, 2010 , p. 245). Although the curriculum espouses reflecting social justice principles, scholars argue that this may not translate to the students (Blanchet Garneau et al, 2018 ; Valderama‐Wallace & Apesoa‐Varano 2020 ) and are often superficial in nature (Franch, 2020 ).…”

“…Furthermore such activities “empower learners to act for the common good ” (Marouli, 2021 , p. 10). A qualitative study conducted on global citizenship education, however, found educators were hesitant to afford an opportunity for students to undertake meaningful activities to globally “make a difference” (Franch, 2020 , p. 520) and instead opted to postpone tangible action to future points in students’ lives. This led the authors to conclude that more critical and “moral” pedagogies are required in global citizenship education, to increase synergy between academia and practice and ensure theory is converted to action (Franch, 2020 ).…”

“…A qualitative study conducted on global citizenship education, however, found educators were hesitant to afford an opportunity for students to undertake meaningful activities to globally “make a difference” (Franch, 2020 , p. 520) and instead opted to postpone tangible action to future points in students’ lives. This led the authors to conclude that more critical and “moral” pedagogies are required in global citizenship education, to increase synergy between academia and practice and ensure theory is converted to action (Franch, 2020 ). This correlates with the notion of praxis as pronounced by Freire, as he concludes there can be “no transformation without action ” (Freire, 1970 , p. 60).…”