1

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES INTEGRATED IN GLOBAL

AND GEOGRAPHICAL EDUCATION
Dr. Susan Bliss New South Wales Director Global Education
Refereed:
Geography Teachers Association of New South Wales for GeographyBulletin, 2005, 37(4), pp. 22-38.
ISSN 0156-9236.
Presented:
Macquarie University June 6 and August 8 2005.
University of Sydney May 11 and May 24 2005.
Abstract
In an era defined by war, terrorism, human rights abuses, racism, poverty, widespread
environmental degradation and unprecedented globalisation, the need for global perspectives
within the school curriculum has never been more apparent. The aim of any such inclusion should
be the development of informed, responsible and active global-local citizens, who work towards a
preferred, equitable, socially just, peaceful and sustainable future world for all people. But the
very notion of a global perspective is complex and in some respects ambiguous. This article
explores the theoretical basis of a global perspective and how values frame perspectives
development. It also describes the application of both in New South Wales Geography syllabuses
and Australian Global Education. Both of these disciplines encourage students to investigate
issues and phenomena from different points of view including a global perspective. Because
knowledge and pedagogy are inextricably linked, students have the opportunity to develop a
deeper understanding and appreciation of our holistic, interconnected, common humanity, with the
aim being to move students perspectives from a biased, ethnocentric, single-focussed, worldview
towards a more open-ended, pluralistic, empathetic world-view.
Introduction
The problems, structural relationships, and emerging changes in the world ought to be
represented from differing perspectives and with greater complexity. The obligation to do so is a
matter of honesty, moral responsibility, and enlightened self-interest (Werner and Case 1996, p 3)
As educators, we have a unique opportunity and clear responsibility to help prepare our students
to be responsible citizens in the future. The fate of our planet and all its life forms lie in their
hands (Slater, 2003, p4)
We live in one world. What we do affects others, and what others do affects us, as never before.
To recognise that we are all members of a world community and that we all have responsibilities
to each other is not romantic rhetoric, but modern economic and social reality.(Department for
Education and Skills, UK, 2004, p1)
Perspectivism is the philosophical view that all perception takes place from a specific perspective. It is not
a single doctrine but a family of views whose common theme is that some central aspect of experience,
thought, evaluation, or even reality is somehow relative to something else (Stanford, 2005). The
philosophical basis of perspectivism can be traced to the Greek historian Thucydides, who introduced
impartiality to historical writing, as opposed to the victors perspective on events (Alford, 1988). He
supported objectivity by presenting a multiplicity of viewpoints, looking upon the world from others
standpoints and articulated these varied, often opposing viewpoints. The Spanish philosopher, Ortega y
Gasset, coined the term perspectivism, arguing that the world can only be known from a specific point of
view and all perspectives are equally valid. Much of this thinking is grounded in Nietzsches work, that
there is no universal truth from which one can survey everything, instead:
there is only a perspective seeing, only a perspective knowing; and the more affects we allow to
speak about one thing, the more eyes, different eyes, we can use to observe one thing, the more
complete will our concept of this thing, our objectivity, be (Nietzsche et al, 1998).
2
Nietzsche states that absolute truth and objectivity are myths that delude us into thinking there is only
one right way of looking at the truth. He supports ideas with quotes such as there are no facts, only
interpretations, every word is a prejudice and why does man not see things? He is standing in the way:
he conceals things (ibid). Nietzsche stated that shifting our perspective allows us to see a new point of
view, and objectivity is only gained by understanding many perspectives on an issue.
Evolution over the last hundred years of a variety of geographical definitional, methodological and
philosophical frameworks requires the integration of a diversity of perspectives (Gauthier and Taaffe,
2000). These include positivism, globalism, multiculturalism, deep ecology environmentalism and feminism
(Te Kura Kete Aronui, 2005) applied to global and geographical education, throughout the document. Post
modernism obviously has had a major impact on perspectives today, described as being the result of
economic, cultural and demographic changes attributed to the rise of an increasingly, interdependent world
economy and the growing importance of the mass media. It is linked to movements that include post-
structuralism, deconstruction, multiculturalism as well as gender and critical theory studies. It critiques
positivism and emphasises the importance of power relationships, personalisation and discourse in the
construction of truth and world views. To escape from constructed knowledge it advocates that it is
necessary to critique and deconstruct asserted knowledge. Even though there are differences on the
interpretations of truth and subjectivity, much of post-modern theory has its foundations in post-
structuralism (Sarup, 1993). Post-structuralists, such as Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze and Lyotard have made
important additions to human understanding, finding their inspirations in the philosophy of Nietzsche. Post-
structuralists question the status of science and argue that a neutral omniscient view outside the realm of
text is impossible. Jean Baudrillard, an advocate of post structuralism, states that during the 20th century we
reached the termination of history and meaning. The method of termination comes through the lack of
oppositional elements in society, with the mass becoming the silent majority, an imploded concept which
absorbs images passively, becoming itself a media overwritten by those who speak for it. By its silence,
people create the extreme situation which is exploited by the aestheticising of politics and the symbollically
viral kind of conflict that is terrorism (Braudrillard, 1983).
Today most of these contemporary perspectives have been integrated within the teaching and learning of
Australian global education (Curriculum Corporation, 2002) and New South Wales geography (Board of
Studies, 1999, 2003). These perspectives range from the narrow, positivism scientific perspective to the
open-ended, pluralistic, worldview of an emerging critical, post-structuralist perspective. Obviously a
global perspective is only one type of perspective but encompasses these other diverse perspectives,
because of its evolving, holistic nature. For example, during the second half of the twentieth century, a
General Systems Theory (GST) or holism (Bochner & Eisenberg, 1987) perspectives approach emerged,
aimed towards understanding ecological sustainability, a value perspective, promoted in both global and
geographical education. Also in our ethnically diverse, interconnected world a multicultural perspective has
evolved, that has been influenced by social constructivism, post-modernism, post-colonialism and critical
theory. Both global and geographical education recognise the plurality of groups, and seek to deconstruct
dominant mono-cultural discourse, that tends to serve the elite and the mainstream majority, by empowering
other voices and their ways of knowing and seeing, an essential element of a global perspective.
Today our students urgently require global perspectives to enable its inhabitants to realise and sustainably
manage its problems such as terrorism, endangered ecosystems and refugees. This urgency has led to the
concept recently gaining academic popularity and educators requiring a better understanding of the
development of the theories, behind the concept, advocated by Hanvey (1976), Pike and Selby (1988), Case
(1993) and Merryfield (1995) and how their theories can be applied to the current curricula. This is because
global interconnectedness and interdependence are increasingly obvious as our planet is a world
characterised by the interconnectedness of species, products, ideas and information; a world that is not so
much a collection of separate lands and peoples, but an interactive, dynamic system in which choices,
events and trends occurring in one location have present and future implications for the well-being of people
and their environments in many other parts of the system (Pike, 1997-1998, p. 7). He added that
connectedness is evident in a wider sense, too, as conveyed in a range of important ideas. These include the
commonality implicit in the shared universal attributes of humankind; perceived links among contemporary
global issues; the interlocking welfare of humans, other species and their environments; a desired
relationship between education and the wider world and the integration of subjects in the curriculum (p. 8).
Perspectives in global and geographical education
In Australia educating for a global perspective, generally referred to as global education, promotes and
supports a futures focused, transformative, evolving curriculum that contributes to an educational paradigm
that stresses unity and interdependence of human society, empowerment, social progress for all, a
3
sustainable and just world and active participation (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p1). As global education
is transformative, it aims to change the minds and behaviour of students, by promoting positive values, such
as commitment to opposing poverty and injustice, and a predisposition to active participation as members of
the global community building a shared, sustainable future (p6). The theory of transformative learning
developed by Mezirow (1978) has evolved into a comprehensive and complex description of how learners
construe, validate, and reformulate the meaning of their experience (Cranton, 1994, p. 22). Centrality of
experience, critical reflection and rational discourse (Taylor, 1998), based on psychoanalytic theory (Boyd
and Myers, 1988) and critical social theory (Scott, 1997), are common themes in Mezirow's theory. For
learners to change their beliefs, attitudes and emotional reactions, they must critically reflect on their
experiences. This in turn leads to a perspective transformation (Mezirow, 1991, p.167). Perspective
transformation is the process of becoming critically aware of how and why our assumptions have come to
constrain the way we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; changing these structures of habitual
expectation to make possible a more inclusive, discriminating, and integrating perspective; and, finally,
making choices or otherwise acting upon these new understandings(ibid.). As described by Mezirow
(1997), transformative learning occurs when individuals change their frames of reference by critically
reflecting on their assumptions and beliefs and consciously making and implementing plans that bring about
new ways of defining their worlds. His theory describes a learning process that is primarily rational,
analytical, and cognitive with an inherent logic (Grabov, 1997, pp. 90-91). Numerous critical responses to
Mezirows theory of transformative learning have emerged over the years (Cranton,1994; Taylor, 1998) as
well as issues such as students must be receptive to receiving alternative expressions of meaning (Boyd
and Myers 1988, p. 277), before transformation can occur.
Global Perspectives: A Statement on Global Education for Australian Schools (2002), the core framework
supporting the new Australian Global Education Project (GEP), aims to prepare students as informed,
responsible, active global citizens by raising awareness and understanding of six main recurring themes:
One World: globalisation and interdependence; identity and cultural diversity; dimensions of change; social
justice and human rights; peace building and conflict and sustainable futures (p10-13). These six broad
learning emphases refer to ethically and politically controversial, contemporary global-local issues that
involve a diversity of conflicting perspectives. These issues require balanced study, critical appraisal and the
capacity to consider different points of view by seeing, thinking and looking from other perspectives, an
essential skill for intercultural understanding in the global village confronted with racism, ethnocentrism
and sexism.
Australian global and geographical education focuses on perspectives as throughout history, people have
different ways of thinking about and describing the human and physical world. Words and images used to
describe the world represented in textbooks often reflected culturally dominant values, and how the world
appears to the most powerful groups and nations (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p3). Generally this
eurocentric, biased, knowledge promoted negative stereotypes. Today this requires deconstruction, by
opening students minds to other perspectives, to enable them to obtain a clearer understanding of what is
truth. It is interesting to note, that the guiding Australian global education document, Global Perspectives
(2002), does not define the complex term, a global perspective, but emphasises the importance of
developing a global perspective (p3) with the aim to equip young people for global citizenship. This is to
be acquired by adopting a perspectival teaching-learning approach that enables students to understand often
conflicting, pluralistic views. This approach challenges students to understand that their limited perspectives
are not universally shared and aims that students will eventually learn to respect and appreciate their own
beliefs, customs and values, as well as those different from their own. As a variety of perspectives coexist
and intertwine over time, a perspectives-teaching approach, aims to move students perspectives along a
continuum from fear to openness accommodating new experiences; naivet to cross cultural
awareness and ethnocentrism to globalcentrism (McCabe, 1994). Opening students minds to alternative
perspectives requires conscious awareness of limited prior, knowledge and cognitive ability, as well as a
perspectives filtering process, through cultural experiences.
From ancient civilisations of China through Roman times, when emperor Marcus Aurelius declared himself
a citizen of the world, there have always been scholars who promoted a global perspective, and
educators with a vision of resolving global issues through education (Conolly, 2002). Today Australian
students, as members of an interdependent, pluralistic, economic competitive, global community, urgently
require the acquisition of relevant global knowledge, skills and values, into their cognitive repertoire, to
enable them to participate in shaping their preferred future, which is hopefully more peaceful and equitable
and expounds social justice and ecological sustainability. In NSW all Stage 4/5 syllabuses (2003) require
students to firstly understand their concrete lived experiences, then examine and understand other
perspectives that encompass difference and diversity (p12); environment (p12); gender (p13) and
multiculturalism (p15). This is reinforced in global education (Curriculum Corporation, 2002) requiring
4
students to understand diversity and contributions of different cultures, values and belief systems and the
nature of racism, prejudice and discrimination (p7). Achieving these goals requires integration of a variety
of perspectives within the learning processes that contributes to the development of the following: capacity
to consider different points of view (p8); critical awareness of bias (p8); empathy for others (p9); and the
ability to detect and avoid cultural stereotypes and prejudices (p11). The aim is also to counter
stereotypical perspectives of seeing developing countries as places of war, famine, drought and natural
disasters. Alternatively, seeing developing countries as only exotic holiday destinations (p20).
The NSW geography syllabuses promote a variety of perspectives through time, space and place, and define
a perspective as a way of viewing the world, the people in it and their relationships with each other and
with their environments (Stage 4-5/Years 7-10, Board of Studies, 1999). Multiple, often contradictory,
perspectives are reinforced in mandated assessable student outcomes such as 4.7 that identifies and
discusses geographical issues from a range of perspectives (Stage 4-5 BOS, 2003 p23) and a global
perspective reinforced in 5.7 that analyses the impacts of different perspectives on geographical issues at
local, national and global scales (ibid, p23). Stage 6 geography (BOS, 1999 p15) states that students learn
to investigate geographically by identifying and discriminating between relevant sources of geographical
information and geographical tools including maps, graphs, statistics and photographs and abstracting,
analysing and synthesising information from a variety of sources and a variety of perspectives. This
supports Nietzsches idea that students should learn to shift their perspective, as there is no universal truth
from which one can survey everything. This skill can be achieved by encouraging students to refer to a
variety of resources and to deconstruct learning material, to enhance their reading of texts, as suggested by
Derrida (Makaryk, 1993). Deconstruction is also about analysis that enables students to monitor facts and
perspectives that reflect racism, ethnocentrism, sexism and paternalism. Chalmers, Keown and Kent (2002)
argued that the Internet helped geography teachers to come to terms with perspectives. In NSW this is
supported by the Geography Teachers Association and the global education (AusAID) websites, providing
links to a diversity of perspectives, frequently ignored by textbook, dependent teachers.
NSW secondary geography (BOS, 1999, 2003), NSW primary Human Society in Its Environment (BOS,
1998) and Australian global education integrate perspectives within essential learning relationships, such as
knowledge, skills and values, that is hopefully translated into informed, responsible, active, citizenship
(Figure 1). Ideally, these subjects work towards Pike and Selbys (1988, p34) perspectives of all people
irrespective of age, class, creed, culture, ethnicity, gender, geographical context, ideology, language,
nationality and race for improved international understanding. This could help work towards alleviating
present tensions between Christianity and Islam, post September 11
th
2001. Some critics argue that lack of
scholarly impartiality, supported by the popular media, has reinforced narrow negative perspectives of
Arab cultures as irrational, menacing, untrustworthy, anti-western and dishonest (Said, 1979). These
perspectives are reinforced by the journalist Du Pasquier, in Unveiling Islam (1992 pp5-7), that Islam has
been reduced to three ideas: fanaticism, fatalism and polygamy. Such misunderstandings and negative
stereotypes should be explained, and all perspectives critically examined, by geography and global
education students with the aim of move society towards a more socially cohesive, sustainable, peaceful,
future world.
5
Figure 1: Perspectives integrated within essential learning relationships
a. Geography (BOS: 1999, 2003) and Prior Knowledge from Primary Human Society in Its
Environment (HSIE) (BOS, 1998)
b. Global Education (Curriculum Corporation, 2002)
a. Geography and Primary Human Society in its Environment b. Global Education
So what is a global perspective?
A standpoint is a place from which to view the world that determines what we focus on as well as what is
obscured from us. This is summed up in a West African proverb that states the world is like a mask
dancing, we cannot see it well if we stand in one place. This proverb, a metaphor for global education, aims
to challenge students to move from a narrow, ethnocentric, single-focused perspective, by standing in
another place. Standpoint theory, drawing on perspective thinking grounded in feminist literature, analyses
social positioning of marginalised and oppressed groups (Butler, 1990). This requires students to stand in
others shoes, listen and understand all perspectives, look at the world through others eyes, think critically
about contemporary, global issues and to be aware that their view of the world, is only one of many. It
depends on where you stand.
As there is no professionally accepted universal definition of a global perspective (McCabe, 1997), its
ambiguity has led to roadblocks, on pathway towards effective implementation in both geography and
global education lessons. Kobus (1983) suggests a global perspective deals with affective content
(emotions, feelings) and global competencies that incorporate essential global information, skills and
attitudes into a person's cognitive repertoire, like global and geographical education in Figure 1. Segall,
Dasen, Berry and Poortinga (1990) stress an understanding of behavioural differences across cultures
whereas Tucker (1986, p66) focuses on the development of global awareness that enables people to
exhibit an intellectual curiosity about the world that transcends local and national boundaries. Hanvey
(1976), one of the first scholarly experts to give a comprehensive definition of global awareness (Burnoff,
2004), proposed a model combining five dimensions that included: perspectives consciousness, state of the
planet awareness, cross-cultural awareness, knowledge of global dynamics, and awareness of human
choices (Figure 2). Case (1993) accepted Hanveys perspectives consciousness dimension, as a starting
point, but expanded it to include the substantive and perceptual dimensions. The substantive dimension
encompassed knowledge of various features of the world and how it works (p 318). It also provided the
foundations for perceptual understanding that involves nurturing perspectives that are empathic, free of
stereotypes, not predicated on naive or simplistic assumptions, and not coloured by prejudicial statements
(p 318). Kirkwood (2001) argued that Case (1993) and Hanvey (1976) provided similar definitions for
global awareness, despite use of different terminology. For example Cases substantive dimension included
contemporary events, conditions and locations in the world, which Hanvey addresses in his state of the
planet awareness dimension. Also in Cases perceptual focus, the development of world mindedness,
empathy, cross-cultural knowledge, resistance to prejudicial thinking and stereotyping was similar to
Equitable, socially just, peaceful, sustainable preferred future
GEOGRAPHY
Stage 4/5/6
(BOS, 1999. 2003)
Perspectives including a Global
Perspective
PRIMARY HSIE
(BOS, 1998)
Knowledge and
Understanding:
Global Geography (Stage 4);
Australia in its Regional and
Global Context (Stage 5);
Global Challenges (Stage 5)
Global geographical issues-
range of perspectives
Skills and
Processes
critical,
analytical and
reflective
thinking
Values and
Attitudes:
ecological
sustainability,
just society,
intercultural
understanding
Civics and
Citizenship
Local-Global
Equitable, socially just, peaceful, sustainable preferred future
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
Across Curricula K-12
Asia-Pacific Focus
integration and fusion of content and
processes across curricula and
throughout school.
Knowledge and
Understanding
poverty, human rights,
globalisation, cultural
diversity, change, peace
building, sustainable futures
Skills and
Processes
critical,
analytical and
reflective
thinking;
empathy,
cooperation,
develop
alternative
views
Values and
Attitudes
social
justice,
sustainable
environmen
t, equality,
eradicate
poverty,
compassion
ate concern
for others
Action and Participation
Local- Global Citizenship
6
Hanveys perspective consciousness and cross-cultural awareness dimensions. Australian global
education encompasses Case and Hanveys definitions that cross-cultural understanding, open-mindedness,
anticipation of complexity, resistance to stereotyping or derision of cultural difference, and perspectives
consciousness--recognition, knowledge, and appreciation of other peoples' points of view--are essential in
the development of a global perspective (Merryfield, 1995). Given the comprehensive, overlapping
theories that relate to the definition of global perspectives, Merryfield combines the scholars definitions by
providing a current framework for the ambiguous, global perspective concept. This includes eight
elements such as: human beliefs and values; global systems, global issues and problems, cross-cultural
understanding, awareness of human choices, global history, acquisition of indigenous knowledge, and
development of analytical, evaluative and participatory skills (Kirkwood, 2001). Kirkwood concludes that
Merryfields work contributes significantly in reducing, if not eliminating, the definitional ambiguities that
still linger in the field (p. 10).
Figure 2: Hanveys interacting global perspectives model (1976)
Hanvey advocates that an individuals worldview is both a matter of conscious opinions and ideas and
subconscious evaluations, conceptions and unexamined assumptions. His perspective consciousness
dimension refers to awareness of and appreciation of other world images, as a persons worldview is neither
universally shared, nor necessarily right. Makedon (1992) goes beyond the human perspective arguing for
perspectival diversity, as to really understand something, visible or invisible, past or present, abstract or
concrete, a variety of human and non-human perspectives must be considered. Makedon promotes
perspectivist because truth, value and meaning are not based on one perspective but on a variety of
frequently conflicting human and non-human perspectives. As humans are part of the world and interact
with the non-human elements, such as the biophysical environment, this theory is closely aligned with the
deep ecology perspective. It promotes care for the non-human with quotes such as let the river live
(Sessions, 1995). But the stress on this non-human perspective has been considered radical by many
curriculum writers.
Makedons perspectival diversity can be applied to Stage 4 Global Environments (BOS, 2003) and Stage 6
Ecosystems at Risk (BOS, 1999). These topics include a case study of human and non-human interactions in
the Amazon rainforest and its subsequent, conflicting management perspectives. This global environmental
issue involves perspectival diversity, which includes the perspectives of: indigenous peoples, lumberers,
conservationists, ecologists, global warming scientists, transnational corporations and governments in both
developed and developing countries. These diverse perspectives are linked to Hanveys perspectives
dimension model but are also integrated within other perspective theories. For example von Bertalanffys
(1998) holistic perspective looks at the rainforest as a whole complex interacting system and chaos theory
notes the sensitivity of complex systems, when a butterflys flapping wings produce large-scale changes
(Coombs & Robertson, 1995). This can be applied to the logging of the Amazon rainforest and its possible
links to global warming and other climatic reverberations such as extreme weather conditions, in other
countries in 2005. Lovelocks Gaian perspective (1979, 1990) sees the earth as a self-regulating, living
super-organism, requiring all human activities to be understood in the larger context of self-organising
Cross-Cultural Awareness
How others view one's own
society as perceived from other
vantage points
State of the Planet
Awareness
Developments, trends,
and problems.
Terrorism,
globalisation,
environmental
degradation, racism,
refugees, poverty
Perspectives
Consciousness:
Awareness and appreciation
of other images of the world.
Pluralistic view
Knowledge of
Global Dynamics
Understand complex
interconnected
world.
Global-local
relationships
Cause-effect
relationships
Suggest solutions
Awareness of Human
Choices
Responsibility for making
decisions made which affect
future generations.
Global-local responsible
citizenship
7
systems (Costanza et al, 1992). A social ecology perspective, aimed to assist with understanding
interrelationships between organisms and their environments (Stokols, 1996), involves understanding
exploitation of timber resources, by colonial and neo-colonial powers. An eco-feminist perspective declares
androcentrism rather than anthropocentrism, precipitated the present environmental crises and the problem
is patriarchy (Sessions, 1995). Both social ecology and eco-feminism analyse where we went wrong by
looking at the history of oppression of minority groups, displaced from logging.
Australian global and geographical education encompasses all these diverse ethical and philosophical
perspectives, that are integrated within teaching-learning methodologies. For example a positivist
perspective (scientific method, Comte 1798-1857) is firstly applied to fieldwork (Stage 4/5/6), research
action plan (Stage 5) and a senior geography project (Stage 6), but geographical and global education goes
further encompassing human perspectives and their actions. The aim of these hands on experiences is to
enable students to hopefully gain truthful knowledge by observing the real world. Students are then
encouraged to critique technocentric and anthrocentric approaches to resource use. They are required to
understand a shallow ecology perspective, concerned with halting the logging of the rainforest, that not only
endangers species and indigenous livelihoods but increases global warming. Geography students are also
encouraged to focus on a deep ecology perspective, which aims to change the way they think (Naess, 1973)
so they will act, responsibly in this holistic, interconnected, interdependent world.
Australian global education and the NSW geography curricula applies Hanveys theoretical global
perspectives model to content and practice (Figure 3) but updates his global awareness to include
indigenous knowledge and voices. As Hanvey in 1976 was unaware of present day neo-liberal globalisation
processes, global education aims to study the impacts of cognitive and linguistic imperialism on
Indigenous heritages, knowledge, and creativity (p. 11) and the problems maintaining Indigenous
worldviews, languages, and environments (Battiste and Henderson, 2000 p. 12). Wilson (2000) articulates
the need for double consciousness as we may be conscious of our own perspective but often are not aware
how strongly our nationality, our culture, and our experiences inform that perspective. To overcome this
issue Hanvey (1976) and Case (1993) emphasise the need to develop multiple, contradictory perspectives,
that encompass other cultures and minority groups. Merryfield and Subedi (2001) noted that white people
because of their race-based dominant position did not develop double consciousness (p.280). Also other
consciousnesses should be included involving different classes, socio-economic groups, race and genders.
With this is mind global education aims to develop skills that enable students to empathise with others and
see connections between ones lifestyle and actions and the consequences for others and the environment
(Curriculum Corporation 2002, p9). Integration of empathy narratives, within lessons, helps to extend the
students perspectives, with the aim to position them at point of stance (standpoint theory perspective), of
another, so they can look and really see through others eyes.
Figure 3: Hanveys theory applied to Australian global education and NSW geography
Application
Global Perspectives
(Curriculum Corporation,
2002)
Application
Geography Stage 4/5 (BOS, 2003).
Geography Stage 6 (BOS, 1999)
Theory
Hanvey s
Dimensions
(1976)
What to teach
Knowledge, Skills, Values
How to teach
Learning Processes
Perspective
consciousness
Sense of self and
interconnections with wider
community (p7)
Australia in the world (p4)
Imagine the world (p3-4)
Controversial, contentious
global issues from diversity
of conflicting perspectives
(p19-20)
Perspectives in Syllabuses-Stages 4/5/6:
Stages 4/5:
Australia in its Regional and Global
Contexts (p42)
Controversial, contentious global issues
from diversity of conflicting
perspectives-inequalities (p31),
geographical global issues (p33);
human rights (p43)
State-of-the-
planet
awareness
Globalising world (p5)
One world: globalisation and
interdependence (p10-11)
Peace building and conflict
(p13
Controversial, contentious
global issues from diversity
of conflicting perspectives
(p19-20)
Globalisation, terrorism, refugees,
poverty, environmental degradation-
Stages 4/5/6
Stages 4/5:
Global Change (p30)-the changing nature
of the world-globalisation
Controversial, contentious global issues
from diversity of conflicting perspectives
Cross-cultural Identity and cultural Intercultural understanding-Stages
Inclusive classroom-avoid
gender and stereotyping
Participation for all-
regardless of race, gender,
ability
Student centred learning-
question, discuss, negotiate
and take action
Experiential learning-
excursions, role plays,
hands on, simulation games
Inquiry based learning-
promote critical thinking
Interactivity-communication
a two way process,
cooperation, express
thoughts, feelings and
responses
Cooperative learning-group
8
awareness diversity (p11)
Social justice and human
rights (p12)
4/5/6
Cultural Integration (Stage 6)
Stage 4/5:
Global Environments and interaction of
different communities (p29)
Cultural integration (p39)
Human rights (p43)
Knowledge of
global
dynamics
Dynamics of change (p11-
12)
Processes, causes, effects
Global Environments, Biophysical
Interactions (Stage 6), Ecosystems at
Risk (Stage 6), Globalisation (Stages
4/5/6)
Stage 4/5:
Global Environments (p29)-processes,
natural and human interactions, effects,
strategies
Globalisation processes, impacts (p31)
Geographical issues-climate change, use
of ocean resources (p33)
Awareness of
human choices
Action and participation (p9)
Responsible citizenship-
global-local,
interconnectedness
Sustainable futures (p13)
Sense of responsibility for
making decisions affecting
future generations
Ecological sustainability-Stages 4/5/6
Mandated Civics and Citizenship-
Stage 4/5
Stage 4/5:
Civics and Citizenship (p12-13)
Role of global citizenship (p32)
Responsibility of individuals, groups and
three levels of government
Sense of responsibility for making
decisions affecting future generations-
sustainable, equitable, socially just future
(p33)
work, negotiate, compromise
and work together to solve
problems
Building self esteem-develop
a positive self image,
encourage participation, set
challenging and achievable
goals
Enabling critical literacy-
media/resources, think
critically about opinions,
arguments and evidence,
detect bias and prejudice
Breadth, depth and
sequence- balance themes
and topics with
developmental
characteristics of students
Using wide variety of
sources- voices and
perspectives from other
cultures, contemporary
realities in various parts of
the world, challenge
stereotypes especially based
on imperialism, racism,
ethnocentrism and sexism
Cases perceptual dimensions
Cases elements in his perceptual dimension included: open-mindedness; greater loyalty to evidence than to
prejudice; complexity that resisted perceiving events in the world as isolated; resistance to stereotypes;
empathy; and facts not based on ones affiliation, referred to as nonchauvinism. Case (1993, p318) referred
to his perceptual dimension as contrasting spatial metaphors such as narrow or broad, provincial or
cosmopolitan, and parochial or far-reaching. His perceptual dimension, the lens for the substantive
dimension, consists of values and attitudes that distinguish a parochial perspective (eg. making sense of
world from a superficial, narrow, self-absorbed point of view) from a broadminded perspective (eg. making
sense of world from enlightened points of view) (p320). If one ignores perspectives different from ones
own with statements I've already made up my mind, there is little chance of developing a deeper
understanding of complex, global issues. Australian global education supports these ideas and promotes
open mindedness (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p6) by encouraging extra curricular activities, such as
overseas collaborative projects (p17), designed to foster humanitarian attitudes. It also promotes Cases
nonchauvinism as well as naturalistic studies relying on observation such as excursions (p17); learning
processes that encompass experiential and inquiry based learning (p18); critical literacy and document
analysis of controversial, contentious issues (p19); that will enable students to develop the skills to think
critically about opinions, arguments and evidence, as well as detect stereotypes, bias and prejudice (p19). It
also encompasses learning processes that aim to broaden students understanding of the challenges of living
in a complex, interconnected global world, by providing them with opportunities to develop positive values,
attitudes and behaviours. All important components, required by students in their role to create a better
world for all (Calder and Smith, 1993)
As the majority of discussion on a global perspective deals with it as an outcome of a formal curricular
process (McCabe, 1997), integrating transdisciplinary global educations global perspective, involves
curricula mapping, that complements current Australian state and territory educational policies. It is then up
to teachers to implement a global perspective because content and practice are inextricably linked, as how
we teach has as much impact on students outcomes as what we teach, influencing students perspectives
and future engagement in world. Pike and Selby (1988) advocate that the teacher makes the difference,
stressing the importance of developing the global teacher who is globalcentric; future focused; respects
diversity; promotes tolerance; appreciates other perspectives; develops students self-esteem; incorporates
different learning-teaching styles; believes in lifelong learning; respects past and present cultures; respects
students rights and encourages feedback and evaluation. The idealistic outcome is the evolution of the
9
globally educated person who possesses broad interdisciplinary knowledge about the contemporary world,
and adaptability, flexibility, and world mindedness to participate effectively in the globalised world
Kirkwoods (2001, p11). As Pike and Selby concluded in Global Teacher, Global Learner (1998, p35) the
judgments we reach are, by their nature, impermanent; stills taken from a life-long moving picture. As
individuals journey through life, with it should come new perspectives, information and ways of looking at
life.
Tye and Tye (1992) goes beyond the global teacher and states that perspective-taking, being able to see life
from someone else's point of view, is important in every grade and every curriculum, for all children and all
adults. This idea supports global educations idealistic evolution of the globally engaged school
(Curriculum Corporation, 2002, p22), that incorporates a global perspective in its mission statement and
formal curriculum documents, across all learning areas, from K-12.
Global perspectives promote values linked to action
Values frame perspectives development in the classroom, guiding what and how we teach. An
understanding and appreciation of multiple global perspectives is important before students are motivated
to act on their perspectives, that promote global and geographical education values, such as justice, peace,
equality, intercultural understanding and sustainability. Effective implementation requires teachers to
explicitly integrate these values within lessons. Then once clarified and affirmed, are then acted upon.
Values clarification is difficult as decisions seem complicated and changes unsettling. As a consequence,
some people flounder in confusion, apathy, or inconsistency. They cannot get clear on their values (Harmin
et al, 1978). Also once values are clarified, whether it results in a change in the students behaviour, is
debatable
Explicit values or ideas, conventions, principles, rules, objects, products, activities, practices, procedures,
or judgements that people accept, agree to, treasure, cherish, prefer, incline towards, see as important and
indeed act upon (Aspin, 2002 p15) are promoted in Australian global education and the NSW geography
syllabuses. These values include developing global perspectives that support: a caring and compassionate
concern for others in the local, national and global community; upholding the rights and dignity of all
people; positive attitudes towards diversity and difference; and appreciation of and concern for the
environment. It also involves a sense of personal responsibility, to act in environmentally, responsible ways
and a commitment to sustainable practices (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p8). These values overlap with
the NSW Stage 4/5 geography curricula that students will develop an interest in, and informed responsible
attitudes towards, people, cultures, societies and environments, with a commitment to ecological
sustainability, a just society and intercultural understanding (Board of Studies, 2003, p10)
Before a global perspective becomes a value it requires transmitting and implanting into students hearts
and minds. This requires bringing knowledge into a deeper level of understandings and into the affective
realm of feelings, then after it is internalised, is can be translated into appropriate behaviour. Value laden,
global education, is reinforced in Hanveys health of planet awareness dimension with concepts of justice
and human rights. Also Pike and Selbys (1988) four dimensions of globality (Figure 4) highlights the
inner dimension that acknowledges the importance of values education integrated within their issues
dimension (equality/inequality, justice/injustice, conflict/peace and environmental damage/care
alienation/participation), spatial dimension (global-local links) and temporal dimension (past, present and
future interconnections). As seen in Figure 4, their four dimension globality model can also be integrated
within Australian global education and NSW geography curricula. Also Pike and Selbys inner dimension
is reinforced in the NSW mandated, civics and citizenship component in history and geography syllabuses
(Board of Studies, 1999, 2003), Australian National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty-First Century (1999)
and the National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (2005). At the global scale there
has been the UNESCO
10
Figure 4: Application of Pike and Selbys interacting four dimensional global perspectives model to
Australian global education and NSW geography.
Sources: Pike and Selby (1995, p6); Curriculum Corporation (2002); Board of Studies (2003)
Values in Education Summit (1998) and today values are reflected in the Millennium Development Goals
(2000). These are benchmarks for progress towards a future vision of development for all people, peace
and human rights, essential for improved international relations in the 21
st
century. Students need to
recognise that they have choices and their actions help shape their future. This was reinforced by Kathryn
Sheehan and Mary Waidner (Pike and Selby, 1995), who found that the following invocation was stated at
the beginning of each meeting of the Iroquois tribal council: let us remember in our deliberations the effect
our decisions may have on the next seven generations.
TEMPORAL
DIMENSION
Interconnectedness past,
present, future
INNER DIMENSION
(values and action)
Process dimension such as experiential
pedagogy and exploring different value
perspectives leading to politically aware
glocal citizenship
SPATIAL
DIMENSION
Interdependence and
dependence- glocal links
ISSUES
DIMENSION
Problems/solutions-
equality, justice, peace,
sustainable environment.
interwoven, multi-layered
a. Pike and Selby
b. Application to Australian global education (Curriculum Corporation, 2002)
TEMPORAL
DIMENSION
Future focused p1
Past: re-imagining world p3
Present: dimensions of change
p11
SPATIAL
DIMENSION
One World: Globalisation
and Interdependence p10-
11
ISSUES
DIMENSION
Global issues Stage 4 p32-33
Global inequalities p31
Access to fresh water, energy use, land, water
and air degradation, waste management,
tourism, threatened habitats, use of ocean
resources, human rights, indigenous people and
self determination, ecological sustainability, just
society, intercultural understanding
Aid, defence, trade, migration, culture, tourism,
communication-Stage 5.
INNER DIMENSION
(values and action )
Values and attitudes p10
Civics and citizenship p12-13
b. Application to New South Wales Geography Stage 4/5 (BOS, 2003)
TEMPORAL
DIMENSION
Future challenges for Australian
population (migration, refugees)
Stage 5
SPATIAL
DIMENSION
Global Geography
Stage 4: eg. globalisation
ISSUES
DIMENSION
Social justice p11
Peace building p13
Sustainable futures p13
Cultural Diversity p11
Interconnections/changes p11
INNER DIMENSION
(values and action )
Values and attitudes p8
Action and participation p9
11
Pike and Selbys fourth, inner or process dimension, emphasises participatory and experiential pedagogy,
that explores different values, leading to politically aware global-local citizenship. This is reinforced in
Hanveys awareness of human choices fostering informed, responsible local-global citizenship, an
important component in Australian global education (p9) and NSW geography syllabus (Stage 4/5, BOS
2003, p12-13).
The teaching and learning of a diversity of conflicting global perspectives aims to develop three value
elements: cognitive, affective and volitional. Thus a value is the belief that goes beyond the cognitive
domain to an affective domain to incorporate a volitional element, or disposition to act. it is only when
students have developed dispositions to act as a result of their learning that a value has been truly
developed (Kriewaldt, 2003). Australian global education and geography aims to develop perspectives
that instil and internalise explicit global education values that require informed, responsible action such as:
recycling waste for ecological sustainability, peacefully demonstrating against human rights abuses in
Burma and lobbying governments to cancel developing countries large overseas debts, with the aim to
reduce poverty and promote equity. Global and geographical education can be integrated within Superka,
Ahrens & Hedstroms (1976) five basic approaches to values education involving inculcation, moral
development, analysis, values clarification and action learning (Figure 5). This approach provides
opportunities for learners to act on their perspectives. As students start to clarify their values, seen as a
process of self-actualisation, they can then progress and develop moral reasoning patterns (Piaget 1932,
1962, Erikson 1950, Loevinger et al. 1970). Hopefully they can then move beyond thinking and feeling to
action learning as they start to interact with society. As values are seen as the interaction between the
person and the society, Francis Hutcheson Scottish philosopher advocates, in Inquiry concerning Moral
Good and Evil (1725), action is best which procures the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers.
Hopefully an anticipated outcome of both global education and geography
Figure5: Perspective-value approaches integrated within Australian global education and NSW
geography
Approaches Purpose and Links
Suggested Teaching-
Learning Strategies
Limitations to
implementation
Global Education NSW Geography
Inculcation
Values as
socially or
culturally
accepted
standards or rules
of behaviour
Reactive
humans
Global Perspectives (2002 p8).
Aims to instil or internalise six
global education values in students
Global Perspectives (2002, p6).
Aims to change values of students
so they reflect transformative
global education desired values
Geography Stage 4/5
(BOS, 2003, p10). Aims
to develop interest in,
and informed and
responsible attitudes
towards, people,
cultures, societies and
environments, with a
commitment to:
ecological
sustainability, a just
society and intercultural
understanding
Model values in the
classroom (eg. equity) and
in the school (eg. recycle
wastes).
Clarify values outcomes for
each lesson.
Expressed in school
mission statement
Explain and understand
values terminology eg.
human rights, ecological
sustainability, social justice
(Glossary, Board of
Studies, Stage 4/5 2003, p
86-87)
Students from a
diversity of
backgrounds and prior
knowledge may be
unable to defend their
values in time scarce
lessons
Teacher centred lessons
focused on content
outcomes rather than
values outcomes
Focus on knowledge
for external
examinations such as
School Certificate and
Higher School
Certificate, rather than
analysing different
value perspectives
Moral
Reasoning and
Development
Moral thinking
develops in
stages through a
specific
sequence.
Active and
reactive humans
Aims to urge students to discuss the
reasons for their value choices.
Aims to help students develop
moral reasoning patterns.
Global Perspectives (2002 p11)-
depends on perspectives, prior
knowledge and acquisition of
narrow nationalistic and
ethnocentric views
Values analysis, uses rational
structured discussion, while moral
reasoning is similar but less
structured (Kolberg, 1976)
Geography Stage 4/5/6
(BOS, 2003, p10). Aims
that students develop
their moral reasoning
patterns at each stage
(4/5/6)
Moral dilemma role plays
Debates.
Simulations of public
meetings.
Analysis of media reports-
without necessarily coming
to a right answer.
Perspectives (Glossary,
Board of Studies, Stage 4/5
2003, p-87) exercises to
discuss diversity of views
on values indicated in
curricula
Huckle (cited in Labert
and Balderstone (2000
p294) stated that it
promoted ideas and
cognitive skills at the
expense of values
thereby reinforcing the
status quo. Reinforced
by rote learning and
examine oriented
lessons
Analysis
Rational thinking
and reasoning.
Rationalist (based
on reasoning) and
Aims to help students use logical
thinking and scientific investigation
to decide value issues.
Aims to help students use rational,
analytical processes in interrelating
and conceptualising their values.
Geography. Stage 4/5/6
(BOS, 1999, 2003 p20-
21) Geographical skills
acquire, process and
analyse
Fieldwork and Research
Action Plans that demand
application of primary
evidence (NSW Geography
Stage 5 BOS 2003 p16-17).
Senior Geography Project
Cash strapped schools
unable to supply a
diversity of resources
as well as valuable
links to the Internet
(broadens
12
empiricist (based
on experience)
Active humans
Global Perspectives (2002 p20)
students are exposed to a diversity
of media and other sources of
information on contentious,
ethically and politically
controversial issues that requires
analysis, balanced study and
critical appraisal.
(Stage 6, BOS 1999)
Research and debate.
Compare primary and
secondary information
sources
perspectives).
Teachers focusing on
knowledge rather than
understanding and
analysis eg. recall and
rote learning
Lessons dominated by
narrow perspectives, in
one resource (textbook)
Little application of
geographical skills
Values
Clarification
Rational thinking
and emotional
awareness to
examine personal
behaviour and to
clarify and
actualise values.
Active humans
Aims to help students identify and
clarify their own values and to
examine those of others.
Aims to help students communicate
openly and honestly with others
about their values.
Global Perspectives (2002 p8)
ability to express views, empathy
for others and to see connections
between ones lifestyle and actions
and consequences for others.
Geography Stage 4/5
(BOS, 2003) value
difference and challenge
social injustice (p13);
develop their own
opinions and to act
responsibly with regard
to the environment
(p13); examine the
importance of social and
cultural practices (p13);
develop a commitment
to ecological
sustainability, a just
society and intercultural
understanding (p16)
Rank ordering and
providing reasons for the
order-values continuum.
Role-playing games (eg.
clearing a rainforest-
indigenous,
conservationists,
developers).
De Bonos six hats.
Contrived (hypotheticals)
or real value-laden
situations.
In-depth self-analysis
exercises, sensitivity and
empathy activities and
small group non threatening
discussions.
Allows students to
conclude that their
values are best and can
foster primacy of self
interest Marsden (cited
in Lambert and
Balderstone 2000
p297).
All values are debatable
depending on the
perspective.
All values are not
universally accepted
Requires students to
appreciation other
values-cross cultural
understanding
Action Learning
Australian
Global
Education
Outcome
Valuing includes
a process of
implementation
as well as
development
Interactive
humans
Aims to provide students with
opportunities for action based on
their values. Students choose to be
involved as members of a
community or social system
Global Perspectives (2002 p9) a
willingness to be involved in action
to support desirable outcomes,
ability to consider the
consequences, capacity to identify
barriers and capacity to reflect on
and evaluate forms of action, to
review progress and to reconsider
forms of action.
Geography Stage 4/5
(BOS, 2003, p12-13)
Civics and Citizenship-
mandated assessable
outcomes
Stage 4/5 (BOS, 2003)
cross curricula feature-
Civics and Citizenship.
Projects within school and
community-Clean Up
Australia, 40 Hour Famine,
Walk against Want, raise
money for 2004 tsunami
victims and plant trees.
Participate in grassroots
organisations (Grameen
Bank), non government
organisations (World
Vision, Amnesty
International) and
international organisations
(WHO, UNICEF,
UNHCR).
At end of lessons record
and assess changes
Students should
develop a realistic
awareness of the
effectiveness of action
and participation and be
encouraged to think
that they can make a
difference but also
should not be misled
into believing they can
remake the world-an
impossible dream.
Action should be based
on deep knowledge and
understanding
Students need to
exercise critical
judgement and be
responsible for their
actions
It can also mask the
need for systemic
change.
Observation by Bliss in 2004, of twenty five secondary social science teachers, in New South Wales, noted
that the application of the values-approach in the classroom, varied according to teaching-learning
methodology, students stage of development and their ability and interests. For example at one end of the
spectrum some teachers taught values using rote learning, methodology with little analysis or action. These
teachers tended to be older, taught in country schools and had been unable to participate in professional
development, over the last ten years. In contrast, mostly younger geography teachers, had moved students
values along a continuum from reactive to active and finally towards being interactive humans. There were
also limitations in the application of some of these approaches, when a few teachers generally teaching in
private schools over ten years, reinforced their own ethnocentric, biased, perspectives. This was more
evident with teachers who generally used one textbook, for the majority of their lessons, and those that
focused on knowledge outcomes aimed a high external examination results, rather than values outcomes.
These teachers tended to ignore student centred activities that involved discussion, critical analysis and
evaluation of a diversity of controversial, perspectives
Generally global educators and geographers aim to develop a value neutral role but neutrality is a myth,
hides in the guise of impartiality and often provides a smokescreen. Paul Freire (1985) disputes that teachers
can and should take a neutral role when exploring values but Kriewaldt (2003) added that being neutral was
acting like Pontius Pilate, and could be interpreted as supporting the dominant ideology. Kriewaldt stated
that teachers have the right to recognise themselves as politicians but not the right to impose their
perspectives and values on students, their political choice. The teachers task is to challenge students to have
13
their own perspectives, to define their own choices but not uncritically assume them. Kriewaldt also
advocated that the teachers role to play devils advocate, illuminated perspectives otherwise ignored.
Development of global perspectives
While Hanvey and other researches provide an understanding of the concepts and traits of a global
perspective, they have not extensively considered how a global perspective, develops and evolves, requiring
psychological and anthropological processes. McCabe (1997) stated that the processes of socialisation,
enculturation, role of the environment and the universal principles of psychology and human behaviour,
can be drawn upon to analyse how people learn and develop global or non- global perspectives. Piaget
suggests that the formation of a global perspective, based on cognitive development, depends on an
individuals capacity to make sense of the world through construction of reality (concrete and formal
operations), which continues to evolve and develop with exposure to the world. Furthermore he suggests
cognitive processing related to fixed stages of development and employs both assimilation (integration of
new external elements) and accommodation (adaptation of internal structures to external changes). McCabe
(1997) noted danger in embracing a universal theory of cognitive global perspective development, bound in
western culture, as it can be misinterpreted by individuals who ignore divergent cultures. Global education
and geography, aware of Piagets theory, balances depth and complexity of a range of global themes, related
to mandated NSW curriculum frameworks. These are shaped by students developmental characteristics,
stages at school (Stages K-12), abilities (gifted and talented, learning disabilities), experiences,
understandings and perceptions of issues.
This leads to the question at what age are students able to appreciate that other people have feelings and
experiences of their own. Woolfolk (2001, p77) observed that perspective-taking ability develops over time
and becomes more sophisticated as a student progresses towards adulthood. Woolfolk cites research of
Selman (1980), who proposed a staged-based model to explain the development of perspective taking and
that only when a child is aged between ten and fifteen years, could they develop the ability to analyse other
peoples perspectives. These findings have adverse implications for effective development of a mandated
global perspective in the New South Wales Human Society in Its Environment K-6 syllabus (Board of
Studies). To overcome this problem Woolfolk suggests that coaching by teachers assists students to take on
the perspectives of others. Global education suggests learning activities such as role plays, debates and
simulations (Curriculum Corporation 2002, p117-19). Such thinking is consistent with a constructivist view
of knowledge acquisition that people cannot perceive the world directly but instead filter it through their
understandings. The development of a students perspectivetaking ability contributes to their
understanding of how knowledge is constructed and assists them to reflect on issues in a critical, reflective
manner. These principles are relevant to ethical and political, controversial global issues, that gives rise to
conflicting perspectives (p19), that require critical appraisal.
Development of global perspectives, while influenced by psychological considerations such as cognition,
needs to be examined within individual cultural settings as a part of global education. Rabinow and
Sullivans (1979) anthropological perspective to cognition and learning assumes all individuals are
enmeshed in a culture, contributing to variations in perspectives. These views are supported by Segall et al
(1990 p184) who stated that individuals in all societies are heir to a culturally shaped way of
conceptualising the world and their relation to it. Some anthropologists argue that a global perspective
develops as a result of cultural transmission and acquisition (McCabe, 1997) but Spradley (1972) advocates
that cultures create rules and that a global perspective, depends on what rules a particular culture assigned to
the process of interpreting symbols. Cross-cultural awareness is an essential component of an
anthropological approach to global perspective development. Danielian and Foster (Brislin and Pedersen,
1976) suggest that cross-cultural awareness can only develop once individuals have mastered insight into
their own values. This allows them greater understanding of other cultures differing values. McCabe (1997)
refers to this process as cognitive confrontation or culture shock, (Oberg, 1960) as it questions a persons
own values as well as creates an understanding through reciprocal cognitive relationship of others cultural
values (Brislin & Pedersen, 1976). McCabe (1997) states that the anthropological approach requires actual
exposure to another culture, to enable comparative observations, that is critical for the development of a
global perspective. In reality most students are unable to travel overseas and instead global education
promotes collaborative projects and action research programs that link students to the other parts of the
world. Teaching global perspectives from an inward-outward journey (concrete-local to more abstract-
global) aims to broaden students global perspectives, when actual exposure is impossible.
Research conducted by McCabe in 1992 (1997), analysed data using domain, taxonomic and theme
analysis. This research required students to categorise their perspectives along five dimensions: fear versus
openness that accommodated new experiences; people are the same and/or different; naivete versus cross-
14
cultural awareness; nationalism versus anti-nationalism, ethnocentrism versus globalcentrism. Data revealed
that participants moved along the continuums of cognition, after study abroad, providing them with a better
understanding of a global perspective. Bliss (2003) applied the same study to Sydney University Master of
Teaching and Bachelor of Education secondary social science students before and after global education
lectures (Group 1- 60 students, 5 weeks) and global education integrated within geography curricula
lectures (Group 2-30 students, 18 months). Scores were written on a linkert scale 1 to 5 (eg, Fear 1 and
Openness 5). The study found all groups had moved along the continuum after lectures. Group 2 moved
along the continuum to a greater degree than Group 1, after completing a longer course. Geography students
started higher along the continuum than history, English and economics students, as the subject discipline
had a greater focus on global perspectives in the curriculum (Board of Studies). A few low scores were
recorded such as two students recorded (2) for fear and five historians recorded (2) for nationalism.
Generally economics students scored the highest in globalcentrism and society and culture students highest
in cross-cultural awareness, which had a higher correlation to content in their subject specific disciplines.
Students with prior overseas experiences in developing countries, rather than developed countries, scored
higher along continuum. As the complex global perspective concept has no common single definition, the
educators role is to identify where students lie on the continuum. Then create innovative teaching-learning
student centred programs, which will hopefully move them towards a global perspective that promotes
qualities such as openness, cross-cultural awareness and globalcentrism.
Why global perspectives should be applied to Australian curricula
Transformative, global education and geographical education, challenges students to both examine and
perhaps change their perspectives and values. Today they can no longer afford to indulge in only a narrow,
nationalistic, perspective. This is because global space has changed and frontiers and boundaries have
become permeable, relationships operate multi directionally and simultaneously and global-local
represents extreme points of a dialectical continuum of complex mutual interactions (Dicken, 1994 p103).
Accelerating globalisation processes and its impacts are evident, even in isolated rural villages in Australia.
Today, hyper-globalists distinguish the present globalisation era from the past referred to as manic
capitalism or supra-territorial capitalism (Ohmae, 1990). This is seen in the qualitative shift in spatial
organisations and the dynamics of new global capitalism, as global finance and corporate capital, rather than
states, exercise decisive influence over location of organisations and distribution of economic power and
wealth. Australian students, as part of this globalised world, need to understand these changing, conflicting,
global perspectives from an inward-outward perspective, as they follow overseas bands and buy global
brands, such as Nike, terrorism and refugees cross national boundaries and there is instant information via
the growing global Internet. From another perspective being connected globally has a double-edged sword,
when the Mydoom virus hitched a ride on one out of every 12 emails, illegal drugs are traded globally,
global warming and environmental degradation impacts on all communities, and an attempt to mix races
and cultures has led to mongrelisation and one size fits all (Poultney, 2005). Some globalisation
processes are depicted as soulless big business (economic); homogenised culture and creeping
Americanisation (social-cultural); lack of compassion for the poor (political); and disregard for the
environment (environmental). The increased number of watchdogs, such as Amnesty International and
satellite imagery, provides other perspectives, enabling greater public awareness of human rights abuses.
This ensures corrupt governments, managed by kleptocratic rulers promoting nepotism and cronyism,
become more accountable and transparent. In the global village new communication technologies have
detribalised humanity, western industrialised products are sold or dumped on economically poorer countries
and in a one-way process authentic, traditional and local culture is battered out of existence (Tunstall
1997, p57). These ethically and politically global issues, give rise to conflicting perspectives and values,
requiring critical appraisal that ensures no perspective has universal endorsement.
Idealistically global education works towards Pike and Selbys (1988, p34) perspectives of all people
irrespective of age, class, creed, culture, ethnicity, gender, geographical context, ideology, language,
nationality and race. Globally all perspectives are accepted as important, encapsulated in the 1948
International Declaration of Human Rights and the 1966 International Convention on the Elimination of all
forms of Racial Discrimination. Unfortunately notable documents, like these, may not affect values and
actions. For example racism, while shifting and reshaping, is still embedded in Australian society. The
burial of the White Australia policy (1901 to 1970s) and the introduction of multiculturalism (1973), with
updated policies in 1999 and 2003, shows a shift in the official Australian racist perspective. As a variety
of perspectives coexists and intertwines in Australias unique multicultural fabric, global education aims to
widen students perspectives so they can recognise and confront racism that will develop informed,
responsible action strategies for sustainable international relations (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p12). As
knowledge and pedagogy are inextricably linked, global education requires students to analyse other
perspectives, especially minority groups (Curriculum Corporation, 2002 p20) and challenge unacceptable
15
forms of discrimination and narrowly nationalistic or ethnocentric views (p11), especially based on the
Anglo-Saxon standpoint that has contributed to the development of racism and ethnocentrism perspectives.
These perspectives have contributed to the creation of barriers between the in group and the Asian/Islamic
other group. The concept of biological inferiority (White Supremacists), fear of an Asian invasion (illegal
boat people) and Islamic terrorists are still covertly predominant, in many Australian minds and overtly
expressed by some political parties. So with the aim to work towards an improved future scenario, global
education focuses on the Asia-Pacific region and Stage 5 Geography has a focus topic called, Australia in its
Regional and Global Context. Both aim to open students minds to the diversity of our neighbours
perspectives, for improved national, regional and global, social cohesion.
Future vision
The development of a global perspective is complex and cannot be confined to purely empirical, theoretical
or scientific analysis, as some positivistic approaches have the potential to be blind with idealism and/or
dogmatism. Research found no clear explanation on the development of a global perspective, as each
subject discipline is limited in its ability to offer a comprehensive holistic overview. Psychology
contributed to intellectual development but failed to recognise differences in non-western processes of
thought and anthropology was limited in its ability to theorise beyond particular cultures. Instead of
narrowing a global perspective to a theoretical base of understanding or to one instructional experience
outcome, Australian global educators work towards defining the components of a global perspective
(McCabe 1997) such as Cases (1993) five perceptual dimensions, Hanveys (1976) five dimensions of
global awareness, Pike and Selbys (1988) four dimensions of globality and Merryfields (1995) eight
elements, that focuses on implementing a global perspective, across all school and university curricula.
The thought processes employed to conceptualise the main global contemporary, contentious global issues
reflects multiple, often conflicting perspectives, but none qualifies as the ultimate perspective. Boerees
(1988) perspective theory, advocates that the immediate and reflective conscious are part of perspectives
formation, enabling students to move towards a future that is sustainable, peaceful, equitable and socially
just. Implementing this scenario requires co-ordinated government and educational policy changes from the
local to the global scale. This is supported by Hanvey and Selby and Pikes curricula reform aimed to
infuse a global perspective, within already overcrowded, traditional subjects, such as geography in New
South Wales. Ideally it also aims to introduce a new interdisciplinary core subject, integrated across
students entire school experience, focusing on all perspectives enabling students to see, think, look and
feel from others perspectives. This involves changing pedagogy that encompasses critical thinking and
analytic skills for coping with complex, uncertain global changes or helicopter vision(Candy et al 1994)
where the learner is able to make connections across bodies of knowledge. The broader and deeper the
knowledge base, using a diversity of perspectives from discrete subject learning areas, enables a greater
repertoire of possibilities when knowledge is translated into new action (Bryce, 2000), an important
component in transdisciplinary, global education. Encouraging fluid, rather than linear thinking, also
enables students to move beyond a limited perspective and subject boundaries, towards a holistic, integrated
global education curriculum, resembling the interconnected world today.
Obviously, global problems, structural relationships and emerging changes need to be represented from
differing perspectives. As Martin Luther King (1929-1968) stated our loyalties must transcend our race,
our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this means we must develop a world perspective. Dr. King argued
that unless we learn to see ourselves as a brotherhood and resolve our global problems, we will perish
together as fools (Washington, 1986, pp117-122).
References
Alford, E. (1988). Written Communication Thucydides and the Plague of Athens. The Roots of Scientific
Writing, v5, n2, 131-53.
Anderson, L. (1979). Schooling and Citizenship in a Global Age, Social Studies Development Centre.
Indiana University: Bloomington.
Aspin, D. (2002). An Ontology of Values and the Humanisation of Education. Values in Education College
Year Book 2002. Deakin, Australian College of Educators, pp12-25
Battiste, M., & Henderson, J. (2000). Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage. Saskatoon, SK:
Purich Publishing.
Baudrillard, J. (1983). In the Shadow of the Silent Majorities. Translated by Paul Foss, John Johnston, and
Paul Patton. New York: Semiotexte
Board of Studies (1998, 1999, 2003). Syllabuses. Sydney: Board of Studies
16
Bochner, A., & Eisenberg, E. (1987). Family process: System perspectives. In: Berger C and Chaffee S, eds.
Handbook of Communication Science, 540-563. Newbury Park: Sage
Boeree, G. (1998). Perspectives Theory. Retrieved May 15 2005 from
http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/persptheory.html
Boyd, R., & Myers, J. (1988). Transformative Education. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 7,
no. 4, p261-284.
Brislin, R., & Pedersen, P. (1976). Cross-Cultural Orientation Programs. New York: Garner Press.
Bryce, J., Frigo, T., McKenzie, P., & Withers, G. (2000). The Era of Lifelong Learning. Retrieved March 2,
2005 from ACER http://www.acer.edu.au/research/Research_reports/Lifelong_learning.htm
Burnoff, L. (2004). Global Awareness and Perspectives in Global Education, Canadian Social Studies,
Volume 38 Number 3, Spring.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble, Feminist Theory, and Psychoanalytic Discourse. In: Nicholson L,
Feminism/Postmodernism. New York: Routledge
Calder, M., & Smith, R (1993). A Better World for All: Development Education for the Classroom, Book 1
(Teacher's Notes) and Book 2 (Student Activities). Canberra: AIDAB/AusAID
Candy, P., Crebert, G., & OLeary, L. (1994). Developing Lifelong Learners through Undergraduate
Education .Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Case, R. (1993). Key elements of a global perspective. Social Education, 57, pp318-325.
Case, R. (1999). Global Education: Its Largely a Matter of Perspective. In the Canadian Anthology of
Social Studies, ed. R. Case and P. Clark, 75-82. Vancouver: BC: Pacific Educational Press.
Chalmers, L., Keown, P., & Kent, A. (2002). Geography and Perspectives: Opportunities for Teachers
Using the Internet. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 11 (2).
Conolly, G. (2002). The Contributions of Geography Teaching to Global Understanding: Evaluation of a
Geography Syllabus. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Sydney.
Coombs, A., & Robertson, R. (1995). Chaos Theory in Psychology and the Life Sciences. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum,
Costanza, R., Norton, B., & Haskell, B. (1992). Ecosystem Health. New Goals for Environmental
Management. Washington: Island Press
Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning: A Guide for Educators of
Adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Curriculum Corporation (2002). Global Perspectives: A Statement on Global Education for Australian
Schools. Victoria: Curriculum Corporation
Department for Education and Skills, UK (2004). Putting the World into World-Class Education. Retrieved
June 2, 2005 at http://www.dea.org.uk/schools/global.htm
Dicken, P. (1994). Global-local tensions: firms and states in the global space-economy. Economic
Geography, 70(2), pp. 101-128.
Du Pasquier, R. (1992). Unveiling Islam, Islamic Texts Society, 5-7
Enloe, W., Minoura, Y., Willis, D., & Kitagawa, T. (1991). Characteristics of Worldminded Attitudes of
Americans and Japanese. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Chicago.
Friere, P. (1985). The Politics of Education: Culture, Power and Liberation. London: Macmillan
Gauthier, H., & Taaffe, E. (2000). The Development of Geographic Thought in the United States.
Unpublished paper.
Grabov, V. (1997). The Many Facets of Transformative Learning Theory and Practice. In Transformative
Learning in Action: Insights from Practice. New Directions For Adult and Continuing Education No. 74,
edited by P. Cranton, pp. 89-96. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Haavenson, P., Savukova, G., & Mason, T. (1998/99). Teacher education reform and global education:
United States and Russian perspectives. The International Journal of Social Education, 13, pp 29-47.
Hanvey, R. (1976). An Attainable Global Perspective. New York: Global Perspectives in Education.
Harmin, M., Raths, L., & Simon, S. (1978). Values and Teaching: Working with Values in the Classroom.
Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing.
King, D. (1973). Teaching towards global perspectives. Intercom. 7, pp. 73-79.
Kirkwood, T. (2001). Our global age requires global education: Clarifying definitional ambiguities. Social
Studies, 92, 1-16.
Kobus, D. (1983). The developing field of global education: A review of the literature. Educational
Research Quarterly, 9(1), pp. 21-27.
Kriewaldt, J. (2003). Values: Dimensions in Geography. Geographical Education, Vol 16 pp41-47
Lovelock, J. (1979). Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University.
Lovelock, J. (1990). The Ages of Gaia: A Biography of Our Living Earth. New York: Bantam Books
Makaryk, I. (1993). Encyclopedia of Contemporary Literary Theory: Approaches, Scholars, Terms.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
17
Makedon, A. (1992). Humans in the World: An Introduction to Radical Perspectivism. Annual Conference
of Midwest Philosophy of Education Society in Chicago, Illinois.
McCabe, L. (1994). The Development of a Global Perspective during Participation in Semester at Sea. A
comparative global education program. Educational Review. 46, (3), pp. 275-286.
McCabe, L. (1997). Global Perspective Development. Retrieved February 3 2005 from
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3673/is_199710/ai_n8771508 and
http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5000563934
Merryfield, M. (1995). Institutionalizing cross-cultural experiences and international expertise in teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 1-9.
Merryfield, M., & Subedi, B. (2001). Decolonizing the mind for world-centered global education. In Ross,
E. W. (Ed.), The Social Studies Curriculum: Purposes, Problems, and Possibilities, pp. 277-290. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective Transformation. Adult Education, 28, pp 100-110.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative Learning: Theory to Practice. In Transformative Learning In Action:
Insights from Practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 74, edited by P.
Cranton, pp. 5-12. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mora, J. (1963). Ortega Y Gasset, Outline of His Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University
Naess, A. (1973). The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement. A Summary. Inquiry 16, pp.
95-100.
Nietzsche, F, Clarke, M., & Swenswen, A. (1998). On the Genealogy of Morality. Retrieved June 4, 2005 at
http://www.pitt.edu/~wbcurry/Nietzsche.html
Oberg, K. (1960). Cultural Shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology. 7, pp.
177-182.
Ohmae, K. (1990). The Borderless World. London: Collins
Pike, G. (1997-1998). Global education: reflections from the field. Green Teacher, Winter, 6-13.
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (1988). Global Teacher, Global Learner. , London: Hodder & Stoughton
Pike, G., & Selby, D. (1995) Reconnecting from National to Global Curriculum, UK, World Wide Fund for
Nature.
Poultney, T. (2005). Globalise Me! A Students Guide to Globalisation. Victoria: Curriculum Corporation
Rabinow, P., & Sullivan, W. (1979). Interpretive Social Science. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. New York: Vintage
Sampson, D., & Smith, H. (1957). A scale to measure world-minded attitudes. Journal of Social
Psychology, 45, 99-106.
Sarup, M. (1993). Post-structuralism and Postmodernism. UK: Harvester/Wheatsheaf
Scott, S. (1997). The Grieving Soul in the Transformation Process. In Transformative Learning In Action:
Insights from Practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 74, edited by P.
Cranton, pp. 41-50. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Segall, M., Dasen, P., Berry, J., & Poortinga, T. (1990). Human Behavior in Global Perspective. New York:
Pergamon General Psychological Series.
Selman, R. (1980). The Growth of Interpersonal Understanding. New York: Academic Press.
Sessions, G. (1995). The Deep Ecology Ecofeminism Debate and its Parallels. Boston: Shambhala
Slater, G (2003). In forward to Global Perspectives in Higher Education: The Improving Practice Series,
Development Education Association. Retrieved June 6, 2005 at http://www.dea.org.uk/downloads/p_gp-
in-he.pdf
Spradley, J. (1972). Foundations of cultural knowledge. In Spradley, Culture and Cognition. San Francisco:
Chandler Publishing. pp. 3-35.
Stanford (2005). Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved May 15, 2005 at:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/
Stokols, D (1996). Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion.
American Journal of Health Promotion, 10(4).
Superka, D., Ahrens, C., & Hedstrom, J. (1976). Values Education Sourcebook. Boulder, CO: Social
Science Education Consortium.
Taylor, E (1998). The Theory and Practice of Transformative Learning: A Critical Review. Information
Series, No. 374. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Center on
Education and Training for Employment, College of Education, the Ohio State University.
Te Kura Kete Aronui, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Perspectives in Geographical Education.
Retrieved May 11, 2005 at
http://www.waikato.ac.nz/wfass/subjects/geography/profdevelopment/perspectives.shtml.
Torney-Purta, J. (1985). Predictors of Global Awareness and Global Concern in Secondary School
Students. Columbus, OH: Mershon Center.
18
Tucker, J. (1986). Global awareness through global education. In Freeman, R. (ed). Promising Practices in
Global Education: A Handbook of Case Studies. New York: National Council on Foreign Language and
International Studies, p. 66.
Tunstall, J. (1977). The Media are American: Anglo-American Media in the World. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Tye, B., & Tye, K. (1992). Global Education: A Study of School Change, Albany: State University of New
York Press. Also retrieved March 3, 2005 at http://www.sonoma.edu/itds/st_projects/lin/definitions.html
The Center for Human Interdependence. Orange County, California
von Bertalanffy, L. (1975). Perspectives on General Systems Theory: Scientific-Philosophical Studies. New
York: Braziller
Washington, J. (1986). A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King. San Francisco:
Harper Row
Werner, W., & Case, R. (1996). Themes of Global Education. (Unpublished). University of British
Columbia, Faculty of Education.
Wilson, A. (2000). Enlarging our global perspective: Lessons from Ghana. Social Studies, 91, 197-203.
Woolfolk, A. (20001). Educational Psychology, 8
th
edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon