Explore the vast range of titles available.

This set of essays critically analyze global citizenship by bringing together leading ideas about citizenship and the commons in this time that both needs and resists a global perspective on issues and relations. Education plays a significant role in how we come to address these issues and this volume will contribute to ensuring that equity, global citizenship, and the common wealth provide platforms from which we might engage in transformational, collective work.

\"This set of essays critically analyze global citizenship by bringing together leading ideas about citizenship and the commons in this time that both needs and resists a global perspective on issues and relations. Education plays a significant role in how we come to address these issues and this volume will contribute to ensuring that equity, global citizenship, and the common wealth provide platforms from which we might engage in transformational, collective work. The authors address the global significance of debates and struggles about belonging and abjection, solidarity and rejection, identification and othering, as well as love and hate. Global citizenship, as a concept and a practice, is now being met with a dangerous call for insularism and a protracted ethno-nationalism based on global economic imperialism, movements for white supremacy and miscegenation, various forms of religious extremism, and identity politics, but which antithetically, also comes from the anti-globalization movement focused on building strong, sustainable communities. We see a taming of citizens that contributes to the taming of what we understand as the public sphere and the commons, the places of cultural, natural, and intellectual resources that are shared and not privately owned. The work of global citizenship education is distinguishable from the processes of a deadly globalization or destruction of the world that responds to the interlocking issues that make life on the planet precarious for human and non-humans everywhere (albeit an unequal precarity)\"-- Provided by publisher.

Considering the key cause of climate-harming carbon emissions is the increased use of fossil fuels, we might expect research in education to engage in petrocriticism—a critical way of reading the world that deconstructs how fossil-fuelled cultural expectations and practices, or “petroculture,” functions in education. To trace the intersection of fossil fuels and education, this article conducts a systematic literature review of both existing and emerging scholarship, engaging in a petrocritical reading of research themes to reveal the extent to which petroculture is naturalized and/or confronted. By examining both dominant research patterns and the notable silences, we conclude by making recommendations for how education scholarship can respond to climate science and contribute to a more livable future through research that takes up (a) petrocriticism, (b) mitigation and decarbonization, and (c) transformation toward alternatives.

\"The ideas for this reader came out of a conference organized through the Centre for Global Citizenship Education and Research (CGCER) at the University of Alberta in 2013. With the high expansion of global citizenship education scholarship in the past 15 or so years, and with most of this scholarship produced in the west and mostly focused on the citizenship lives of people in the so-called developing world, or selectively attempting to explain the contexts of marginalized populations in the west, the need for multidirectional and decolonizing knowledge and research perspectives should be clear. Indeed, the discursive as well as the practical constructions of current global citizenship education research cannot fulfill the general promise of learning and teaching programs as social development platforms unless the voices of all concerned are heard and validated. With these realities, this reader is topically comprehensive and timely, and should constitute an important intervention in our efforts to create and sustain more inclusive and liberating platforms of knowledge and learning.

Educating for global citizenship is increasingly named as a goal of education. This study examines the variations in intent and approach to global education and educating for global citizenship. A review of the literature identifies the links between citizenship and globalization as well as the conflicting discourses and agendas surrounding citizenship education in a globalized neoliberal policy context. Using a conceptual framework that highlights three contrasting approaches to globalization—a neoliberal approach, a radical approach, and a transformational approach—this article compares three global education policies and their citizenship education approaches and highlights the issues implicit in each as well as the problems and possibilities for furthering a social justice agenda. The article concludes that education for global citizenship is a complex and contested concept and that educators who claim to be educating for global citizenship must be clear on the implications of their work.

This volume brings together diverse theoretical reflections and practices of community engaged scholarship in order to stimulate critical discussion, deepen theory, and invite critical practice. It is an international trend that higher education institutions and agencies are encouraging and promoting community engagement.

The story of the WE enterprise, also known as ME to WE or WE Charity, presents us with a cautionary tale for teachers who welcome social enterprise into schools as a way of bringing community engagement and social justice into their educational programs. Our paper is a cautionary tale that, like all such tales, opens with the statement of a warning about social entrepreneurship in schools. As the narrative unfolds, this warning is disregarded, and the violator ultimately experiences an unpleasant fate. Using the large-scale data available on Instagram, this paper reveals in detail how WE represented itself, how others perceived it, and how it worked in and with schools to achieve its corporate goals. We conclude the tale by discussing how, by delinking education from corporate interests, schools may serve equity and the public good instead of creating brand fanatics in the service of elite interests.

As the world went suddenly into lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, sending individuals to their homes and shutting businesses and institutions, the closing of schools posed big problems. The majority of the world’s children were out of school, leading to the longest sustained period of school closures in history. We saw educators turning towards responses not aimed at collegial and community-engaged strategies for education in an emergency but at online learning cast as education/business as usual. This study explores the logic driving this global response through analyses of the documents released by three key global education actors: (1) the OECD and its paper A Framework to Guide Education Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020; (2) UNESCO’s Global Education Coalition #LearningNeverStops; and (3) the World Bank’s Guidance Note on Education Systems’ Response to COVID-19; and Guidance Note: Remote Learning and COVID-19. The authors of this article draw on Carol Bacchi’s approach to poststructural policy analysis to make visible the key concepts and binaries used within policy texts and to understand the “technologies of saving” that were invoked in each policy response, locating the education programmes, activities and actors within knowledge practices in educational reform. This article explores the World Bank, OECD and UNESCO responses using an analysis of knowledge harmonisation and difference among these institutions as well as their location as key norm-setters and governing actors in the field of education. The authors argue that all three responses privilege private-sector providers of digital technology. The consequence of these responses is that technologies of saving have centred on privatised, corporate edu-business and edu-tech aimed at online education delivery, bringing significant risks for the erasure of local knowledges. The authors’study suggests that local policymakers, including community-based and national actors, must be invited into the discussion to envision other possibilities and to name the potential destructiveness embedded in the international organisations’ actions. Que sauvons-nous? Sur la piste du savoir dominant et du discours de vérité dans les réponses politiques mondiales à la COVID-19 – Quand le monde s’est brusquement confiné à cause de la COVID-19, renvoyant les gens chez eux et fermant entreprises et institutions, la fermeture des écoles a posé de gros problèmes. La majeure partie des enfants dans le monde se sont retrouvés hors des établissements scolaires, ce qui s’est traduit par la plus longue période de fermeture des écoles de toute l’histoire. Nous avons vu des pédagogues se tourner vers des réponses qui ne visaient pas à trouver des stratégies éducatives collégiale et axées sur la communauté dans une situation d’urgence mais à simplement adopter une forme d’apprentissage en ligne pour continuer d’enseigner comme d’habitude. Cette étude se penche sur la logique qui sous-tend cette réponse globale en analysant les documents publiés par trois acteurs clés de l’éducation: (1) Un cadre pour guider une réponse éducative à la Covid-19 en cas de pandémie de 2020 de l’OCDE; (2) la Coalition mondiale pour l’éducation #ContinuitePedagogique de l’UNESCO et (3) deux notes d’orientation de la Banque mondiale: Note d’orientation sur la riposte des systèmes éducatifs au COVID19 et Note d’orientation mise à jour: Apprentissage à distance et COVID-19. Les auteures de cet article s’inspirent de l’approche analytique de la politique poststructurelle de Carol Bacchi pour mettre en relief les concepts clés et les binaires utilisés dans les textes politiques, et pour comprendre les « technologies de l’économie » invoquées dans toutes les réponses politiques, situant les programmes, les activités et les acteurs de l’éducation dans des pratiques du savoir en réforme éducative. Cet article examine les réponses de la Banque mondiale, de l’OCDE et de l’UNESCO en recourant à une analyse de l’harmonisation du savoir et des différences au sein de ces organismes ainsi que leur position en tant que décideurs clés qui imposent des normes et acteurs déterminants dans le secteur de l’éducation. Les auteures affirment que les trois réponses privilégient les fournisseurs de technologie numérique du secteur privé. En conséquence, les technologies de l’économie se sont focalisées sur un entrepreneuriat et une technologie privatisés en vue de proposer des services éducatifs en ligne, ce qui met considérablement en danger les savoirs locaux risquant ainsi d’être effacés. L’étude des auteures indique que les politiques locaux, y compris les acteurs communautaires et nationaux, doivent être invités à prendre part au débat afin d’envisager d’autres possibilités et dénoncer le pouvoir destructeur potentiel que recèlent les actions des organisations internationales.