Resources

This research is the second-year study for a three-year project (2013-2015) focused on the global citizenship education of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations). In the first-year study (2013), the current global citizenship education presented in the social studies curriculum of each country was analyzed based on literature research, and the global citizenship of students from each country was examined through surveys. Based on the analysis of the current global citizenship education of Korea and ASEAN overall and the characteristics of global citizenship of students from each country, this study is designed to make an in-depth analysis of global citizenship education and to seek direction for the joint global citizenship education programs between Korea and ASEAN to be employed in the third-year research.
The students from the two countries, Indonesia and Thailand, among the 10 ASEAN countries are selected as participants because these two countries also participated in the previous international comparison study. The purposes of this study are as follows; (1) comparing the current global citizenship education of the national-level curriculum of Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand, (2) finding the similarities and differences by analysing the characteristics of global citizenship education of Korean, Indonesian, and Thai students, and (3) proposing the direction and themes of global citizenship education which will be mutually applied in Korea and ASEAN countries based on the research results.
To conduct this study, various methods including literature study, interviews through visits to local schools, conferences for specialists, and international seminars were used. First, the meaning and goals of global citizenship education were established by reviewing literature and the concepts of ‘Humanity’, ‘Global Identity’, and ‘Global Participation’, which are the three sub-indices for global citizenship extracted from the first-year study, were used. Based on this framework, interview protocols for students, teachers, and policy makers were composed.
The research team visited Indonesia and Thailand, carried out semi-structured interviews with students, teachers, and policy makers of national-level curriculum and classroom observations, and collected data related to global citizenship education. In addition, by conducting an international seminar with policy makers of curriculum of each country’s Ministry of Education and UNESCO specialists, we aimed to seek direction for joint global citizenship education in Korea and ASEAN and to reinforce educational cooperation.
The major findings of this research can be suggested according to the research purposes in the following way.
First, in the analysis of the national-level curriculum made for the comparison of current global citizenship education of Korea, Indonesia, and Thailand, the curriculum of each country is found to include elements of global citizenship education. However, countries show discrepancies in their actualization of curriculum, and citizenship education is still centered on national citizenship rather than global citizenship. Therefore, a more systematic attempt is needed for the advancement of citizenship education from nation-centered to globally oriented.
Second, the findings from the interviews with students of each country carried out to define the characteristics of global citizenship of Korean, Indonesian, and Thai students indicate that while students’ responses showed a number of similarities in general, differences were found in specific answers as well. High school students provided more logical answers with greater depth compared to middle school students, and their responses differed based on their cultural contexts and experiences rather than their gender or religion. Therefore, while taking an approach which considers the level of students’ cognitive development as well as the cultural distinctiveness of each country, a way to expand opportunities for specific activities and experiences rather than an abstract way of teaching should be considered.
Third, based on the analysis results, the directions and themes for global citizenship education to be jointly applied in Korea and ASEAN countries are proposed as follows: (1) The curriculum for global citizenship education should be focused on reinforcing the competency of citizens to participate in communities rather than that of individuals to ensure international competitiveness. (2) It is necessary to educate students to confront various conflicts and solve them by themselves rather than teaching them the abstract answers to the conflicts. (3) Global citizenship education should move beyond knowledge-based education and aim to lead bring changes in students’ behavior thereby empowering them to settle global issues. (4) For the actual implementation of curriculum, the cultural distinctiveness of each country and the differences by groups should be considered. (5) It is important to help students spread their interest to diverse countries beyond Western countries or ‘developed countries’.
With these points in consideration, the objective of global citizenship education to be jointly promoted in Korea and ASEAN is suggested as the following: “Citizens are cultivated to form their identity as Asians based on their interest and knowledge of Asia and to participate in settling global issues. Through this, their qualities to participate in issues concerning all humanity are eventually cultivated.” The specific themes may include understanding Asia and ASEAN, social justice and equality, diversity, globalization and interdependence, conflict and peace, as well as sustainable development and environment. To improve effectiveness of joint global citizenship education of Korea and ASEAN and to reinforce educational cooperation, we made the following three suggestions.
First, the standardization of global citizenship education across the nation is required. Having defined global citizenship education as the cultivation of the qualities of citizens based on the perception of human rights (Humanity) and with the identity as a global citizen (Global Identity) who can participate in settling the issues of global society (Participation), global citizenship education will yield the greatest efficiency when carried out together by all beyond national boundaries. Therefore, it is suggested that research for developing and expanding the joint curriculum by regions be supported and close cooperation be formed between policy makers of national curriculum and officials of International Training and Cooperation.
Second, the reinforcement of global citizenship education through teacher training is required. For the effective implementation of joint global citizenship education in each country through the standardization of global citizenship education, the cultural diversity and distinctiveness of each country should be reflected. For these reasons, various practical bottom-up strategies are needed. Teacher training is a mandatory prerequisite for global citizenship education that is appropriate for the situations and contexts of each country. Therefore, it is suggested that researchers find out how to reinforce global citizenship education in teacher training based on solid research.
Third, global citizenship education should be expanded by the exchange of human resources. As confirmed in this study, the exchange itself can bring a positive influence on the cultivation of global citizenship, and the sharing of the strategies for global citizenship education in each country can contribute to the development of a model for better global citizenship education. Therefore, it is suggested that the research for the joint promotion of project-based global citizenship education and the opportunities for mutual exchange of students and teachers between Korea and ASEAN countries should be expanded.