Book Review: The Bloomsbury Handbook of Global Education and Learning

Theoretical Framework

The first two sections feature various theoretical frameworks including a number of approaches. In building a method of conceptualizing a model of GE, Liam Wegimont – like Bourn a distinguished GE thinker and activist – presents some philosophical considerations that require deep examination. These include deliberations on GE’s epistemology, ontology, nature of change, geopolitical perspectives, curriculum, pedagogy, and philosophical anthropology (what it is to be human).

In a chapter on global learning in Western higher education, Sharon Stein presents three possible theoretical approaches: learning about difference, learning from difference, and being taught by difference. She critiques the first as a “business as usual, North-South” approach, while learning from difference takes the next step toward incorporating diverse perspectives. However, it avoids “addressing the structural relations that are shaped by global patterns of unequal power” (p 70). Being taught by difference is an approach that is informed by the mistaken assumptions of the first two strategies. It requires unlearning of an often-unconscious belief in entitlement, political authority and moral superiority. The effect is a “walk . . . together into the unknown, learning from our mistakes and our successes as we go” (p 72).

The book includes a few references – and one chapter – to a distinct orientation to life from Sub-Saharan Africa known as Ubuntu. As explained by Malgorzata Anielka Pieniazek, much of the research, theories and evidence in GE have come from the Global North, with little recognition of the indigenous philosophies of the Global South. She notes that “Ubuntu can . . . be understood as trying to capture the essence of what it is to be human, highlighting the interconnectedness and unity between human beings and linking the individual to the collective . . . . It is expressed through qualities like acceptance, respect, compassion, empathy, generosity, hospitality” (p 80). Pieniazek goes on to meaningfully apply the concept of Ubuntu to the various interpretations of GE.

Pedagogy

As noted, the volume includes a number of significant pedagogical approaches to GE. Paulo Freire’s critique of neoliberal orthodoxy in education and his learner-centered, social justice approach is frequently cited. In a chapter describing a university-based framework for ethical global citizenship, educators in the UK, US and Japan sought to develop the skills and knowledge necessary for students to be able to critically assess and evaluate inequitable education and social structures. The chapter includes examples of ethics-oriented programmes in the three countries.

Related to the focus on ethics is a chapter by Philip Bamber on the development of values in global citizenship education (GCE), which states that the field has moved beyond ‘values-neutral’ goals. The 2015 World Education Forum sponsored by UNESCO stated that education should be characterized by “the skills, values and attitude that enable citizens to lead healthy and fulfilled lives, make informed decisions and respond to local and global challenges” (p 264). Bamber’s comments on pre-service teacher education will be discussed in a later section of this review. Notwithstanding these ambitious goals, teachers are often hesitant to promote particular values because they may not want to confront controversial issues and potential opposition from government, educational institutions, parents, academics, other teachers and students. This was the US experience when a curricular movement called Values Clarification, developed in the 1960s, was greatly diminished by conservative governments in the 1970s. Nonetheless, an emphasis on the values of global citizenry is a worthwhile focus for educators.

Another relevant pedagogical approach is featured in a Finnish programme that focused on students’ understanding of their own global responsibility and their connections to a shared responsibility for the world’s problems. The chapter states that universities often position themselves within the modern/colonial global imaginary of mainstream development and are therefore at risk of reproducing a hegemonic approach to the world. It is important for students to critique this position through self-reflexive experiences that highlight their obligations and accountability in a global context. In a similar vein, a research course in Vienna has students exploring the concept of “glocality” by first examining their own society and analyzing the “global in the local”. For example, Vienna’s intersectionality in terms of ethnicity, religion, economics and living standards can reveal the society’s values and their reflection in policies. Analyses of in-migration or Austria’s role in World War II provide compelling evidence for the GE student and budding researcher. The course supports the idea of “crossing borders in both directions” by starting with a scrutiny of one’s own society before moving beyond to either the Global South or North. This resembles the “inside-out” approach to prejudice reduction in which a person completes a self-assessment of their possible privilege and biases before analyzing “the Other”. A notable feature of the seminar is its emphasis on insight above knowledge (though the latter is obviously important). However, it was mildly surprising to learn that the culminating assessment was a 30-page paper. It would seem that students could demonstrate their awareness of glocality through more contemporary media.

An innovative, relevant GCE course in Spain was designed for “Generation Like” (as in “liking” a Facebook post), the age group that utilizes social media as a major form of communication. “Generation Like” is familiar with the critical approach of social media, and specifically its “quick and dirty” format in which a lack of space often facilitates unsubstantiated arguments. The chapter describes undergraduate students in a class on advertising and public relations. Its interdisciplinary approach combines GCE with media literacy and communication for social change. In this “MeToo” and “Black Lives Matter” era, a transformational course that builds creative skills in global social justice through the media is essential not only for public relations professionals but for all proponents of GE, GCE and social justice.

Finally, it is well known that a lot of learning takes place away from school. One study analyzes the effects of informal or non-formal learning, which refers to the independent growth and discovery that is part of a lifelong learning process. The case narrates the interactions in an international non-formal camp sponsored by an NGO that aims to build active global citizens. The camp conducted formal activities relating to sustainable development and human rights activities, and also provided informal spaces for learners to reflect and practice what they had experienced. When away from structured learning the participants interacted more earnestly, contemplating and learning together. The experience in these spaces was intense for participants due to the strong emotions felt and expressed.

Research and Evaluation

Annette Scheunpflug, another well-known GE researcher and author, tackles the challenging area of research and evidence in the field. While the volume includes several research reports, there is a widespread understanding that many more quality investigations are needed. Scheunpflug declares that “evidence in global learning . . . seeks the empirical proven relation of a learning input and a learning outcome or – in other words – the impact of activities of global learning” (p 41). Her typology of “proven” evidence places meta-studies at the highest validity level. Next comes randomized field research, followed by quasi-experimental studies, comparative and correlative examinations and single studies. With the exception of a small number of meta-analyses (including this volume, which can also be considered a meta-analysis) nearly all the investigations are single studies. While the researchers were understandably limited in resources, their investigations were largely short-term rather than longitudinal. Unfortunately, this denied them (and us) the possibility of knowing whether participants’ GE perspectives, knowledge and/or skills were retained beyond the activity studied. Overall, while Scheunpflug’s typology can be critiqued for its reliance on quantitative methodologies (generally preferred by structuralist orientations through “hard-science” research) there is a clear implication that more rigorous analyses – quantitative or qualitative – are required to establish and maintain a reliable professional standing.

A few chapters present designs for evaluating GE and GCE programmes. In discussing strategies to emphasize ethical GE curricula, Emiliano Bosio offers three dimensions that can assess the quality of a GCE curriculum design: 1) an inclusive self-identity that situates the learner within a group of global citizens; 2) a critical cognizance, in which learners are critically able to appreciate diversity and cross ideological boundaries; and 3) a move from an “ecotistical to ecocritical” orientation, in which the curriculum seeks to shift learners from an egotistical view of the environment to one which is ecologically sensitive (pp 188, 194-197).

In a chapter on Development Education (DE) and Global Learning (GL), Adelina Calvo lists the following criteria for effective (DE) programmes in Spanish schools (pp 282-283):

Context

Naturally, a country’s history and current context greatly influence its approach to GE and GCE. In general, states that have experienced colonization and are currently under-resourced are less focused on global citizenship than on local needs. Simon Eten Angyagre observes that resource-poor and conflict-prone countries in Sub-Saharan Africa may be hesitant to adopt GE and GCE because they are not seen as a fruitful course of study. The region is identified with nationalism and ethnocentrism, and its countries lack infrastructure. They therefore must focus on the challenge of providing access and participation, and may view GE as a curricular luxury that emanates from the West. An example is Ghana, whose goal is to develop market-driven, job-specific technical skills for graduates who can then participate in the global economy. Unfortunately, the rigid national syllabus locks teachers into a curriculum and assessment system that is neoliberal in design and offers few content references to globalization. Though their approaches are somewhat different, the chapters describing GE in Zanzibar, Tobago, Tanzania and South Africa resemble Ghana’s experience and present status. Colonization and oppression have led to caution and skepticism toward the critical pedagogy espoused by GE.

An overriding characteristic of GE is the struggle to respond effectively to globalization while maintaining loyalty to the local context. Over-reliance on the former can lead to an emphasis on global competitiveness and graduates with “marketable” skills. Too much attention to the latter may result in unproductive caution toward change and economic stagnation. An example is Poland, an “in-between” country whose approach to European GE is different than that found in their Western neighbors due to its context: relative ethnic, cultural and religious homogeneity, a lack of colonial legacy, and deep memories of totalitarian oppression by Germany and the Soviet Union. On the one hand, because of its history Poland believes it has a lot in common with aid recipients, yet manages to overlook its economic progress and feels like it should be on the receiving end of development assistance. As a result, Polish teachers often take a surface approach to GE and GCE – they teach the lessons but do not attempt to change their own attitudes or beliefs, or those of their students. A similar situation can be found in Taiwan, whose Confucian traditions favor an authoritarian and teacher-centered instructional approach which is anathema to the critical pedagogy endorsed in GCE.

Links and Partnerships

Links between Global North and South schools and institutions have existed for decades, but the “partnerships” often feature unequal power arrangements that result in Northern charity. In a description of a Tanzania-UK link Alison Morrison lists four issues that need to be considered for linking to be effective (p 293):

Despite the goal of an equal-status partnership, it appears as though in this situation the UK played more of a senior role than its Tanzanian counterparts. Professional learning coursework was conducted in Tanzania, with UK teachers joining online. Nearly all teacher visits were made by UK teachers to Tanzania, with very few going the other way. A controversial aspect of this partnership was the lack of reciprocity in student exchanges – decided through a mutual agreement between the UK and Tanzanian partners. In effect, on this issue Tanzanian teachers acted “in loco parentis”. They feared that if the Tanzanian students visited the UK they would become disheartened by the disparity in wealth and power. This might lead to a “have” and “have not” perspective and a loss of faith in global education. I believe that this aspect undercut the effectiveness of the link. Tanzanian students can readily see life in the UK and Global North on television and through social media. With deft planning by their teachers they would not be so shocked or disillusioned during a visit to the UK. Further, by not allowing them to visit the UK (assuming resources were available), they were prevented from joining with their UK peers on mutual projects. In her recommendations for other possible links Morrison states that “Caution should inform any plans for student exchanges”. This makes sense, of course, but the lack of reciprocal student exchanges weakened this particular collaboration.

There were other linkages described in the volume that purported to be “equal-status” and two-way in design but that appeared unbalanced in practice. In a description of overseas volunteering and its relationship to GE, Mags Liddy details a “partnership” between school systems in Ireland and India in which volunteer Irish teachers provide professional development for Indian teachers. The report discusses the reactions of Irish teachers observing other Irish teachers training the Indian teachers and does not include interviews with any Indian teachers. There may have been more sharing of goals and perspectives between the two groups but this was not often mentioned in the chapter. A linkage between Tobago and the UK also purported to be mutually beneficial, but did not lead to an increase in local student knowledge or appreciation for GE (largely due to the national policies mentioned above in the Context section).

A notable exception to the typical power imbalance between North and South was a Wales-Zanzibar collaboration reported by Cathryn MacCallum, Mark Proctor and Nicholas Hoad. The partnership lasted for ten years and resulted in an improvement in Zanzibarian teacher and student motivation and understanding of humanity, global social justice and responsibility. Results for Wales were not reported, since the chapter focused on Zanzibarian GE. In addition, the participating schools in Zanzibar improved in cognitive measures of school performance.

In a parallel vein, many of the GCE programmes and policies include a service learning component. Like its North-South counterpart, service learning programmes have often been unable or unwilling to go beyond a surface one-way transactional treatment in which privileged students venture forth into the community, make a contribution and return home. Despite an attempt to insure greater mutuality by defining and employing a new term – “community engagement” – these programmes still struggle with the inherent power imbalance. An example is a community-engaged learning programme in Brazil that attempted to develop more nuanced, ethical and genuine relationships between American and Brazilian university students. As described in the case study by Ali Sutherland, Rene Susa and Vanessa Andreotti, students from American universities visited Brazil to interact with their Brazilian counterparts. The goal was for both sets of students to become mindful of existing power relations and engage in a reflexive experience that would help them understand their collective roles in globalization. Unfortunately, though not remarkable, the American students did not understand how their privilege and historical relations of power contributed to global inequalities. Though the authors only reported on the interviews with five American students and no Brazilians, they did note that indigenous Brazilian students stated that capitalism was partly to blame for their oppression. While the American students understood the critique, they wanted to hear a proposal for an alternative economic system that would “fix” the problem (a typical Northern approach to problem-solving – find the answer). Of course, the problem was much too complex for immediate fixing and couldn’t possibly yield a single solution, which highlighted the difference in the two perspectives. From the interviews with the Americans it did not appear as though their prior beliefs changed, though they did develop lasting individual relationships with their Brazilian peers.

An example of community engagement that seems to be effective is the South African experience described by Nicolle Chido Manjeya. Its history of oppression under apartheid and the inspiration of leaders such as Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu enabled the country to develop an extremely strong sense of social justice. Thus, along with standards for teaching, learning and research, community engagement to address inequity is a significant part of the national policy for higher education, and some institutions have expanded the concept of community beyond South Africa’s borders. It is noteworthy that South Africa’s conception of marketable global skills includes a focus on social justice.

Teacher Education and Professional Development

The volume includes many references to pre- and in-service teacher education and professional development. In general, pre-service teacher education throughout the world does not focus on global education, and the book’s examples of continuing professional development mostly refer to individual courses or workshops presented by governments, universities and NGOs. In a study of in-service teacher education in ten EU countries, Massimiliano Tarrozzi describes the central role played by NGOs: “Almost everywhere, NGOs provide in-service teacher education (especially in Austria, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, England) and push initiatives for pre-service teacher education (Austria, Bulgaria) and teachers’ support (Ireland, Italy Portugal)” (p 141).

Chapter authors on GE in Taiwan, Nigeria and Poland make specific recommendations to upgrade pre- and in-service teacher education by including increased coverage of critical GE and GCE. In these countries as well as many others, teachers are relegated to following the national curriculum and preparing students for standardized assessments prior to entry into universities or specific programmes. Taiwan’s top-down, Confucian orientation has been reflected in its professional development offerings. In both Taiwan and Poland the researchers commented on the difficulty that teachers have in addressing controversial issues such as human rights and social justice; in Taiwan “it is therefore vital to develop new teacher training programmes to equip teachers from different learning areas and levels of education with the requisite knowledge and capability to integrate global issues into curriculum content; they also need to hone their skills in transformative pedagogies” (p 157). In Nigeria both pre- and in-service teacher training have been under-resourced. Initial teacher education can begin after students complete primary or secondary school, and in-service training has not been prioritized by the government. Despite these challenges, the “teacher education paradigm is shifting from the simple training of teachers towards the education of globally competent teachers” (p 380).

As noted, pre-service teacher education in GE is generally critiqued as lacking in emphasis. While his references may be outdated (2003 and 2008), Bamber states that few programmes prepare pre-service teachers for moral education, though there is evidence that teacher educators help develop values in student teachers who then nurture them in their own students. Further, in 2015 the British government strongly recommended including the analysis and teaching of values in pre-service programmes.

In a chapter that analyzes effective characteristics of continuing professional development (CPD), Clare Bentall states that because of the lack of coverage in pre-service teacher training the in-service education of practicing teachers is critical. Various authors remark that wherever GE and GCE are prominent in policies and programmes their roots can often be traced to enthusiastic teachers. Bentall echoes this observation by recognizing that the most powerful motivator for the professional development of teachers is the possibility of advancing student learning. Thus, CPD can inspire teachers through its impact on student growth. The chapter’s characteristics of effective GE continuing professional development have been well-researched and are fairly standard: 1) teachers need to learn new things that are not congruent with existing understandings, though they must be relevant to learner context; 2) they need time to reflect and practice; 3) CPD needs to focus on subject-specific pedagogical knowledge; 4) it is advisable to provide for collaboration to form learning communities; and 5) long-term CPD, rather than one-off workshops, provides greater learning (pp 356-35).

While I tend to agree about the general lack of GE and GCE in pre-service teacher education, none of the references mentioned the US context. American standards for pre-service teacher education include requirements that novice teachers be able to develop critical thinking skills in learners and demonstrate an understanding of the interconnectedness and complexity of the world’s problems (NCATE, 2011). Global learning and social justice are addressed in three types of pre-service global teacher education programmes: 1) preparation for overseas teaching; 2) preparation for domestic and non-domestic settings; and 3) the most prevalent, preparation for domestic settings (multicultural and anti-racist teacher education) (Levy and Fox, 2015). The social justice orientation of these approaches frequently includes critiques of neoliberal orthodoxy in education.

Summary

As stated, this volume is an excellent resource for educators, policymakers, researchers and others who are interested in global learning and global citizenship education. The content is substantive and comprehensive, and presented by accomplished authors. Douglas Bourn and colleagues should be congratulated on making an important advance to the field.

Update: Global Education, The Pandemic and Black Lives Matter

While this book has a 2020 publication date its chapters pre-date the coronavirus pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement. A quick internet search of the keywords “Global Education and the Pandemic” resulted in a number of publications that address the effects of the pandemic around the world, and often cite the disproportionate impact of the virus on poorer communities populated by people of color (see below). Similarly, a search for the keywords “Black Lives Matter Around the World” generated many websites that address the global reach of the anti-racist movement (see below). As of this writing these developments are too recent to determine their influence on GE or GCE, but they will unquestionably be addressed by governments, academia, NGOs and other educators, and will probably result in dramatic changes to PK-12 and teacher education curricula.