Philosophy and Definition

The definition of global education given to respondents for their reaction was the one from the 1991 Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) Yearbook entitled, Global Education: From Thought To Action. That definition was: Global education involves learning about those problems and issues which cut across national boundaries and about the interconnectedness of systems—-cultural, ecological, economic, political, and technological. Global education also involves learning to understand and appreciate our neighbors who have different cultural backgrounds from ours; to see the world through the eyes and minds of others; and to realize that other people of the world need and want much the same things.2 They were asked, “How does this definition fit within the context of the current educational philosophy of your nation?” It seemed from the 52 responses to this question that “global education” was not a widely used term in much of the world; but that (a) the concept was generally understood, (b) elements of the definition were common to educational systems in many nations, and (c) there were global education movements in some countries. Those few respondents who felt that the definition did not at all fit with the philosophy of education in their countries cited concerns for nation building, regionalism and religion as reasons. For example, a statement from one lesser developed country was, “Global education, as proposed by the U.S. and other industrialized countries, does not correspond to the needs and expectations of the so-called ‘Third World’ countries. Global education is a Euro-Western initiative and it would be somewhat inadequate to fully apply the models that have sprung from it to [our] context.” The respondent went on to explain that her government had implemented a package of educational reforms that were geared to obtaining a better life quality for the people through social justice, participation, social control and education for all. The label given to this idea by the respondent was sustainable development. The large number who felt that elements of global education existed in their schools tended to discuss one or more of the systems mentioned in the definition—-e.g., environment, intercultural relations, technology, economic development While this was encouraging, it has to be noted that in most cases, such issues tended to be dealt with in a nationalistic sense. That is, for example, learning to care for the environment of one’s own country; or improving relations between various ethnic groups within one’s own country. It was the “cutting across national boundaries” part that tended to be missing in these cases. Global education, as defined in the questionnaire, was felt to be a significant factor in the educational systems of a number of nations. On the one hand, there were countries, in which the term was not commonly used, but understood and many elements of it existed. On the other hand, there were countries where there was official support for the movement. Somewhere in the middle were countries such as the United States where the term “global education” was generally understood, and there were reported to be a number of ongoing projects. In the normative section of Chapter Two, other definitions of global education were explored briefly for their meanings and so that they would be available along with the data for those who might be interested in using this report as part of an international dialog about global education. These definitions included Robert Hanvey’s now classic An Attainable Global Perspective, and the UNESCO Statement of Purposes for Worldwide Educational Policy.3