Possibility of educating ‘global citizens’ through a Chinese national school curriculum

ABSTRACT

While global citizenship education (GCE) becomes increasingly popular, the concept is still contested in definition and assumes different meanings in various contexts. Many countries have started including GCE-related concepts in national educational policies and school curriculum. However, not much empirical research has been conducted on GCE in the curriculum in non-Western countries, particularly how GCE interacts with the existing citizenship education in national or local contexts. This article explores the possibility of educating global citizens in the formal curriculum in Chinese secondary schools dominated by nationalism. Utilizing a multiple case study design, data were collected from six high schools in Beijing and Shanghai, China. The study identified explicit and implicit elements related to global citizenship in the textbooks of a GCE-related subject and in teachers’ conceptions. The curriculum aims to develop qualified citizens with global awareness and global competence as defined in the Chinese discourse. The global elements in the curriculum reflect a tendency to cultivate global awareness derived from Confucianism, which contains a deep sense of collectivism, intertwined with China’s educational requirement to meet the need for building a modern country in the globalized world.

KEYWORDS:

• Global citizenship education
• citizenship education
• formal curriculum
• secondary school
• China

A fast-paced and fast-changing 21st century has raised discussions about how to prepare youth for a globalized society and for building a better world. Global citizenship education (GCE) is one consideration, with widescale support in most Western societies. Many organizations and countries have started emphasizing GCE-related themes in educational policies and adding curricular content aimed at developing a global orientation among students (Goren & Yemini, 2017). Although various typologies have been developed to understand and frame global citizenship and GCE, scholars have criticized the discussions on global citizenship have been dominated by Western philosophical notions in democratic contexts (Goren & Yemini, 2017). The scholarship on ideas related to GCE emerging from the philosophies and notions of the non-western world, particularly the East, has been documented less (Choo, 2020).

Since the opening up policy in the 1980s, the Chinese Government has stated to “orient education towards modernization, the world and the future” (MOE, 2010) and claimed to develop international talents with global perspectives to meet the requirement of opening up the Chinese economy and society to the world (MOE, 2010). More recently, the Chinese Government has proposed building “community of shared future for humankind” to explore the Chinese approach to solving global problems. Concepts related to global citizenship and GCE are currently being discussed among academics and politicians in China, while the current knowledge on citizenship education and GCE is mainly historical and descriptive. How relevant ideas of global citizenship are interpreted in the formal curriculum within a socialist modern country dominated by Confucianism is worthy of investigation. This article aims to explore the concept related to GCE in China’s centralized education system from a formal curriculum perspective, specifically, what GCE elements can be found in the Year 10–12 subject Thought and Politics and how teachers understand developing global citizens through citizenship curriculum in high schools. The article first reviews the contested views of global citizenship and various typologies within the existing literature of global citizenship education briefly. Then it tries to position the concept of global citizenship education in the Chinese context and provide a background for the study. The aims of the study and methods and instruments used are explicated and then the findings are reported. The article concludes by providing discussions and reflections on the study and suggestions for future research.

Contested views of global citizenship and GCE

The concepts of global citizenship and GCE have been conceptualized from a range of theoretical positions, yet no systematic theory or consensus has been achieved to date. A general understanding is to prepare students with the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values to thrive in a globalized society and to solve global problems and make a better world (Davies, 2006; Morais & Ogden, 2010; Oxfam, 2015; Print, 2015; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2013). Various typologies have been developed to understand and frame global citizenship and GCE. From an education perspective, Dill (2013) poses the importance of recognizing the tension in education for global citizenship from two perspectives: GCE as global consciousness and GCE as global competence. “Global consciousness” indicates an awareness of other perspectives, a sense of being part of human community and a “moral conscience” to act for the common good, while “global competence” emphasizes the practical knowledge and skills needed to succeed in global economics and global marketplaces.

The global consciousness approach indicates a “cosmopolitan perspective” that is founded on a philosophical approach based on ethical kindness, equality and justice and is seen as an orientation or “a way of inhabiting in the world” (Hansen, 2011). Kaldor (2003) summarizes that “the cosmopolitan ideal combines a commitment to humanist principles and norms, an assumption of human equality, with a recognition of difference and indeed a celebration of diversity” (p.19). Key abilities within this concept include recognizing and respecting diversity, a sense of solidarity and shared humanity and dialogue with different perspectives from local, national or global communities (Osler, 2008 in Peterson, 2020, p. 23). In contrast, the discourses of GCE that stress developing competence to succeed in the global marketplace raise concerns regarding the pervasive neoliberal influences on educational policies and practices (Myers, 2016). Scholars point out critical concerns that GCE becomes a tool for the state to “create individuals that are enterprising and competitive entrepreneurs” (Olssen, 1996, in Peterson, 2020, p. 27), which challenges collective identity and reframes relationship as constituted by individual choices and preferences. They critiqued the neoliberal framing of global citizenship as losing the communal ideas of solidarity, common humanity and social justice (Peterson, 2020) and harming the essence of GCE (Yemini, 2021).

Peterson (2020) proposes the “globally oriented citizenship” that emphasizes human relationships based on the concept of common humanity. According to Peterson, globally oriented citizen is attentive to others, values human interaction with others and approaches such interactions with a commitment to reciprocity and solidarity. He emphasizes personal citizenship experiences in shaping global citizenship and argues that “the globally oriented citizen can only be understood through recourse to the various contextual notions and practices of citizenship that impact on citizens and which, in turn, shape and delimit the nature of and possibilities for global citizenship” (p.41). He argues for more insightful empirical studies to illuminate how global citizenship education is understood, practised and experienced in schools from various contexts.

Oxley and Morris (2013) developed a more comprehensive typology containing two categories of conceptions of global citizenship in terms of their ideological underpinnings: the cosmopolitan type that represents mainstream models of global citizenship from four perspectives: political, moral, economic and cultural global citizenship; and the advocacy type that refers to more critical approaches and tends to involve a strong degree of advocacy from a particular perspective, including social, critical, environmental and spiritual global citizenship. This typology is a useful tool to identify the focuses of certain concepts of global citizenship and to categorize global citizenship definitions in empirical studies.

Within the abundance of conceptual and empirical literature on GCE, very few are conducted from Eastern contexts. As scholars point out, the existing discussions on global citizenship and GCE have been dominated by Western philosophical notions in democratic contexts (Goren & Yemini, 2017), and there is a dearth of research to shed light on GCE from non-western contexts. Choo (2020) demonstrates the need for more scholarship on ideas related to GCE emerging from the philosophies and notions of the East. An increasing number of studies that focused on the cultural differences embedded in GCE have acknowledged that the cultural and ideological differences in the West and East cannot be ignored in GCE research (Dreamson, 2021). Thus, GCE studies from the East contexts are needed to expand the international understanding of GCE and relevant practices.

Positioning global citizenship education in the Chinese context

The term “civic and citizenship education” is not commonly used in China’s educational policies and documents. Related terms in the Chinese context mainly include moral education and political education. Since the time of Confucius, moral education in China has focused on teaching young people to acquire morality, abide by social rules and be loyal to the country. After the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, civic education mainly served to cultivate national identity, loyalty to the state and the Communist party and collectivism (Law, 2013). Since adopting the modernization policy in 1978 and the emergence of a market economy, China has witnessed vast economic growth and an increasingly open society (Zhong & Lee, 2008). However, the modernization of people’s thoughts is inconsistent with the achievements of material modernization (Ban & Tan, 2015). Educators and scholars noted that the “stagnation” of Chinese people’s civic quality has become one of the main obstacles to the social development of modern China and argued for the importance of cultivating modern citizenship (Ban & Tan, 2015; Feng, 2014; Wang, 2010). Therefore, training the next generation to become modern citizens is one of the most important educational tasks in contemporary China.

Into the 21st century, the powerful influence of globalization and the continuing rise of the “socialist market economy” triggered the awareness of concepts related to global citizenship in China. The market economy requires new aspects of citizenship qualities, for example, global perspective, orientation towards achievement, open-mindedness and democratic awareness. In addition to strengthening modern citizenship education, it is essential to integrate international visions and cultivate the next generation with global awareness and competence for the 21st century (Feng, 2014). These changes are reflected in the revision of the national curriculum. The citizenship curriculum in primary and secondary schools has shifted from the original focus on socialist collectivism to multi-dimensions, including domains from self, family, nation and the world (Ho, 2018).

In 2017, the Chinese Government put forward the concept of “a community with a shared future for humankind”, calling for joint efforts to build a world community forged by a common destiny. The connotations of the concept include sovereign equality, dialogue and negotiation, cooperation, exchange, mutual learning and green development (Xi, 2017), which share broad connections with the ideas of global citizenship. These new concepts have created a public atmosphere of global consciousness in China. Discussions about global citizenship, cosmopolitan and similar terms have increased in recent years, and research on the Chinese understanding of GCE has been rising.

Wang (2019) summarized the interpretations of GCE in Chinese academia and found that scholars believe global citizens should have certain knowledge, skills and values, which have much in common with the international literature. Meanwhile, Chinese scholars tend to define global citizenship from a multidimensional identity framework with an emphasis on the fundamental status of national identity while expanding the global domain. For example, Zhou (2008) refers to “global citizen” as an international perspective on the premise of the establishment of national identity. Global citizenship has the dual characteristics of global and state, universal and national.

Song (2018) suggested considering national identity as a basis from which to aim for global identity, with reference to the principles of sovereign equality and win-win cooperation. Accordingly, many scholars have highlighted the viewpoint of strengthening socialist civic education and cultivating national citizens who have a strong sense of national pride and adhere to traditional Chinese culture, while grasping new trends of global education in the face of the rapidly changing world (Li, 2009; Song, 2018; Zhou, 2008). An ideal “global citizen” in the Chinese context is thus an individual who adheres to socialist core values and at the same time has a strong sense of global responsibility, pursuing ideals of “the unity of the world” and upholding the idea of “harmony in diversity” (Song, 2018, p. 32). Despite the discussions in academia and policies, empirical studies are needed to explore what GCE elements are in the existing school curriculum and how teachers interpret the concepts particularly.

Regarding the formal curriculum, no independent subject of global citizenship has been established in the Chinese national curriculum. The most relevant are subjects for political and moral education. This empirical study aims to shed light on the existing global elements in the formal curriculum (school subject) in high schools in China, although it may not be referred to as the term “global citizenship education”. The subject most relevant to citizenship education in high school is Thought and Politics (sixiang zhengzhi), commonly referred to as the “political course”. Specifically, the study explores how multiple meanings for GCE are defined, the extent to which these meanings find their way into the curriculum and how the teachers understand developing global citizens through the curriculum.

A conceptual framework of GCE model for the study

Scholars in education have provided frameworks for the essential components of global citizenship. Schattle (2009), for example, argued that the most readily converged thinking of global citizenship relates to ideas of awareness, responsibility and participation. Based on Schattle’s (2009) three elements, Morais and Ogden (2010) described three dimensions of global citizenship aligned with prominent theoretical and philosophical perspectives in the literature: global competence, global civic engagement and social responsibility. “Global competence” involves global knowledge, intercultural communication skills and self-awareness; “global civic engagement” refers to involvement in global civic organizations and having a political voice. Social responsibility on a global level may involve global justice, empathy for others and recognition of personal responsibility for the collective good (Morais & Ogden, 2010). Other pervasive frameworks of global citizen attributes are provided by international organizations and regional education institutions. Most institutions divide learning objectives for GCE into multiple dimensions that mainly involve knowledge, skills, values and actions. For example, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2013) proposed core conceptual dimensions of GCE, including cognitive, social-emotional and behavioural dimensions; Oxfam’s (2015) GCE objectives include knowledge and understanding of globalization and diversity, skills such as critical thinking, and values and attitudes towards social justice; OECD (2018) included four target dimensions of global competence: knowledge about global issues and intercultural issues, socio-economic development and interdependence, values like global mindedness and openness, and capability and disposition to take action.

For this study, the researcher did not construct a fixed model of GCE but aimed to explore the understanding and practice of relevant ideas in the Chinese context. Nevertheless, applying no framework or one that is too broad might cause problems in identifying common themes across case studies. Yin (2014) suggests that a theoretical proposition can represent key issues and guide the research design to determine data collection and analysis strategies (p. 38). While cognizant of the connotations and assumptions inherent in the concept of global citizenship and GCE, this research applies a broad model of global citizenship in terms of key definitions. Specifically, based on the prevalent ideas of global citizenship in current discourse from an international perspective (Morais & Ogden, 2010; Oxfam, 2015; Schattle, 2009; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2013) and the existing Chinese notions of desired attributes of global citizens (Law, 2013; Song, 2018; Tan, 2015; Wang, 2010), this research defines global citizenship with three key dimensions: competence, awareness and engagement at a global level (see Figure 1). Global competence includes the knowledge and skills needed for functioning in the globalized world; global awareness implies knowledge and fundamental values of the importance of being a global citizen and thinking for the common good; global engagement requires concrete knowledge and skills to deal with global issues while more importantly emphasizes taking actions motivated by the basic values implied in the concept of GCE.

Figure 1. Global citizenship model.

In addition, the model includes the notion of multidimensional identity as it plays an important role in the Chinese understanding of citizenship. As the concept concentrates mainly on a conscious level, the multidimensional identity is categorized into global awareness in the global citizenship model, while it may overlap with other dimensions (Figure 1). This conceptual framework is used as a starting list to identify the GCE elements included in the curriculum and teaching practices and the dimensions they focus on in order to support further analysis.

Methodology

The study used the dataset from a large project that investigates GCE-related learning in China’s secondary schools through formal and informal curriculum. Using a multiple case study design, the study collected qualitative data from six high schools in Beijing and Shanghai, China. This article focuses only on the formal curriculum (school subject), specifically, the compulsory subject Thought and Politics, for Years 10–12. The data for the study include document analysis of curriculum standards and textbooks and interviews with ten subject teachers from the case study schools. Using a proposed GCE model, the study investigated which GCE elements are in the curriculum content and how the teachers understand educating “global citizens” through the curriculum.

The study applied the design of multiple case studies following the logic of what Yin (2014) called “literal replication” (p. 57). The cases were carefully selected to predict similar results to enhance validity. The multiple case study design increased the strength of the findings by facilitating an in-depth examination of several cases with common factors or that revolved around a common phenomenon (Stake, 2006). Additionally, given that the practice of global citizenship related elements at this stage is not systematic in many schools, the multiple case study design was intended to identify as many global orientations as possible to make the findings more meaningful.

Schools and participants

Participants included in this article were from six high schools (Schools A to F) in Beijing and Shanghai. These schools were chosen as cases for the large project according to school type and willingness to participate. The three types of schools were included – model government schools, ordinary government schools and non-government international schools – which reflected the diverse nature of education in China. The first type – model government schools – are approved by the national or provincial government and feature leading educational and pedagogical reforms, high student academic performance, high-quality school management and staff resources, and emphasis on moral education. The second type is ordinary government high schools. These two types of high schools are government funded and account for about 80.3% of all secondary schools in China (Ministry of Education, 2019). These schools follow the centralized national curriculum system, with uniformly developed and audited teaching materials. The third type is non-government international schools, which do not receive government funding as the sole source of funds. They implement international curricula and admit mainly students from mainland China.

Two or three subject teachers of Thought and Politics participated in interviews in each school, depending on their willingness. Some teachers have other duties, often related to student affairs, for example, Teacher 3 at School B as Deputy Director of Student Affairs Office and Teacher 1 at School D as SRC co-ordinator. School E was excluded because it implemented the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) curriculum which does not include Thought and Politics. Although School F implemented the same IBDP as School E, Shanghai’s local policy requires all international schools to implement four national compulsory subjects, which include Thought and Politics. Therefore, one subject teacher of Thought and Politics at School F was invited to participate in the interviews. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the schools and teachers that participated in the interviews used for this study. Anonymous names were used in the paper for the participants, for example, Teacher 1 in School A (T1-SA).

Table 1. Characteristics of schools and participants.

School type	Schools	City	Curriculum system for Year 10–12	Participants	Major duty at school
Government model	School A	Beijing	National	Teacher 1 (T1-SA)	Thought and Politics subject teacher
				Teacher 2 (T2-SA)	Thought and Politics subject teacher
	School B	Shanghai	National	Teacher 1 (T1-SB)	Thought and Politics subject teacher, Head teacher
				Teacher 2 (T2-SB)	Thought and Politics subject teacher
				Teacher 3 (T3-SB)	Thought and Politics subject teacher, Deputy Director of Student Affairs Office
Government ordinary	School C	Beijing	National	Teacher 1 (T1-SC)	Thought and Politics subject teacher, Head teacher
				Teacher 2 (T2-SC)	Thought and Politics subject teacher
	School D	Shanghai	National	Teacher 1 (T1-SD)	Thought and Politics subject teacher, SRC coordinator
				Teacher 2 (T2-SD)	Thought and Politics subject teacher, Director of Student Affairs Office
Non-government international	School E	Beijing	IBDP	N/A
	School F	Shanghai	IBDP	Teacher 1 (T1-SF)	Thought and Politics subject teacher

Data sources and data analysis

This study primarily used data from document analysis of curriculum standards and textbooks for the subject Thought and Politics, and interviews with ten subject teachers. The documents General High School Curriculum Standards for Thought and Politics (Experimental) (Ministry of Education, 2004) and the most recently revised version, General High School Curriculum Standards for Thought and Politics (Ministry of Education, 2017), were analysed. In addition, the official textbooks audited by the Ministry of Education (MOE) for the subject Thought and Politics were analysed. The government schools in Beijing used the national version of textbooks, while the high schools in Shanghai used a Shanghai version that had local characteristics added. The two versions did not differ significantly despite the arrangement of the contents – the Beijing version had four books divided into economics, politics, culture and Marxist philosophy, while the Shanghai version had two books for economics, one for political studies and one for culture and Marxist studies combined (see Table 2). Textbooks were the primary teaching material used by most teachers in both cities.

Table 2. Textbooks analysed for the subject thought and politics.

	Module	School
National version	Economic Life	School A
	Political Life	School C
	Cultural Life
	Philosophy and Life
Shanghai version	Economic Life 1	School B
	Economic Life 2	School D
	Political Life	School F
	Culture and Philosophy

The interviews with teachers were semi-structured and guided by a list of questions relating to the research topic but with a flexible design (Bryman, 2012). Applying the GCE model proposed earlier, my aim was to explore their understanding of GCE elements in the subjects they taught, their opinions on how well students gained global citizenship attributes through the curriculum, and the consistency of teachers’ interpretations and curriculum standards.

Data were analysed using the thematic analysis approach with inductive and deductive coding of the content. The conceptual framework of the GCE model containing the global competence, global awareness and global engagement dimensions was first constructed into coding frames to guide analysis. At the same time, I allowed for new codes and themes to better understand the topic. The coding process applied Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña (2014) three concurrent flows of data analysis components: data condensation, data display and conclusion drawing or verification. NVivo 11 was used to assist with the coding process and data management.

Findings

GCE elements in the teaching objectives and textbooks

Although Thought and Politics was a nationalistic subject designed for patriotic education and socialist education, many GCE elements were found scattered in textbooks content. The curriculum contained four compulsory modules (textbooks)—Economic Life, Political Life, Cultural Life, and Philosophy and Life. Document analysis found GCE elements scattered among the content objectives, teaching suggestions and topics in each module. Table 3 shows the lessons and topics in each module that explicitly contains GCE elements.

Table 3. GCE-related lessons in thought and politics (sixiang zhengzhi).

Module	Lessons directly related to GCE	GCE elements	GCE model
Economic Life	Economic Globalization	Knowledge of economic globalization, openness of global market, rules of international trade, WTO, etc. Critical thinking about international competition and cooperation, the rules of international trade, etc.	competence (economic)
Political Life	Contemporary International Society	Knowledge of sovereign states and international organizations Critical analysis on the role of the UN and other international organizations Competition, conflict and cooperation between countries China’s foreign policy, etc.	awareness, competence (political)
Cultural Life	The Diversity of World Cultures	Cultural development in social practice and cultural innovation (e.g., Western Renaissance cultural works, world-famous works) Valuing cultural diversity and respect for different cultures How Chinese culture promoted world civilization, etc.	competence; awareness (cultural)
Life and Philosophy	Dialectical Materialism; Historical Materialism	Philosophical worldviews of Chinese and foreign thinkers The dialectical concept of interconnectedness, development and transformation Using the dialectical method to explain the importance of critical thinking, etc.	competence (philosophical, thinking style); awareness

The four compulsory modules contained many explicit GCE elements in the content that primarily covered the GCE model’s global competence and global awareness dimensions. Each module contained intense knowledge points that would benefit being a global citizen from economic, political and cultural perspectives; for example, as the table shows, lessons about global market, the World Trade Organization (WTO), international relations and world cultures. Moreover, the teaching suggestions emphasized the development of skills, such as critical and analytical thinking skill. For example, lessons in Economic Life suggested “discussing typical cases of applying WTO rules from both pros and cons”, and in Political Life teaching suggestions stated, “having discussions of critical analysis on international relations and United Nations rules”. The module Philosophy and Life introduced Marxist dialectical and historical materialism because Marxism was considered the philosophical cornerstone of the Chinese socialist system. Despite the ideological purpose, this module tried to equip students with basic thinking skills based on philosophical views, which are in accordance with those essential for global citizens, including but not limited to a worldview of interconnectedness, development and transformation, dialectical thinking of the whole and part. These thinking skills overlapped with attitudes and values in the global awareness dimension.

Meanwhile, the curriculum tried to cultivate certain attitudes and values that fell into the global awareness dimension of the GCE model, mainly concerned with notions of the interconnected world, respect for different perspectives and diverse cultures and a general sense of humanity. For example, Political Life aimed to “enable students to recognize the interconnectedness of the world and understand that peace and development is a major theme of contemporary society” (Ministry of Education, 2004, p. 8). Many topics in the cultural module conveyed the message of showing respect and value for different cultures and recognizing the universal values of humanity. One of the textbooks’ core values was that life’s meaning was to serve people and society, including the world and humankind, which indicates a sense of responsibility for humanity.

Compared with the elements in the global competence and awareness dimensions, less was mentioned regarding the actions. Topics that relate to participation focused mainly on voting and exercising civil rights. There was little content about engaging with international organizations or taking actions on global issues. Furthermore, fewer topics on human rights and social justice were found in the content.

In addition, national identity and national interests play a substantial part in the discourse of developing global perspectives in textbooks. For example, the themes in the economic module stressed national economic development in the globalization context. The political module focused on “understanding the impact of international competition and cooperation on national development and enhance national identity” (Ministry of Education, 2004, p. 6). The Cultural Life module aimed to make students gain confidence in Chinese culture and disseminate it to the wider world. This module also embedded the identification of socialist culture and values as essential for national citizens. These discourses were consistent with the curriculum objective—“to educate citizens with patriotism, collectivism and socialist beliefs and feelings” (p.3).

Teachers’ conceptions of teaching global citizenship through the curriculum

Teachers’ views of the GCE elements in the curriculum were mainly in accordance with the findings from the document analysis. They recognized the explicit contents related to GCE in the textbooks and showed positive attitudes towards the potential to develop “global citizens” they assumed through the curriculum. Most of the participants conceptualized global citizenship as a broad and complex notion. For many teachers, developing global citizenship was to prepare students to live in a globalized society, which includes essential competitiveness for a global economy and awareness for common humanity. For example, the participants emphasized having a comprehensive understanding of economic globalization and its impact on personal development. Teacher 2 at School A said,

We should be aware of the power of the global market. You are bound to be involved in this economic globalization. It is an irreversible trend. And when you have that realization, you [students] should apply your personal goals and your worldview from a broader level. You should break regional limits and involve the global perspective…No matter whether it concerns trading, education, studying abroad, personal development or career planning, all things should be planned from a global perspective.

(T2-SA)

With China’s opening to the world, some teachers believed it is more important today than ever to prepare students to be competitive in the global market. Teacher 1 at School C explained:

Especially in the past few years, I feel that China’s development has multiple connections with the global society, such as the Belt and Road Initiative. Many of my graduates work in transnational companies, living in Hong Kong and Singapore … So in class, I often tell my students where their path is, how to make career plans, what qualities should be improved, and how to be competitive in the international workplace.

(T1-SC)

Besides certain knowledge and skills, one of the “competitiveness” raised by the teachers was “critical thinking”. The teachers interpreted critical thinking as the ability to think and make judgements rationally and independently. In a teacher’s words, “to train students to think critically instead of accepting everything they are taught is very important to make them qualified citizens” (T3-SC). Participants from the international schools interpreted critical thinking as the ability to see multiple possibilities and to make judgements rationally. Most teachers were optimistic about cultivating this ability through the curriculum. For example, a teacher argued that the module Philosophy and Life involved teaching critical thinking:

It [Philosophy and Life] teaches you how to see the world, for example, how to make value judgements and choices… When I teach this section…I tell them [students] that when you consider an issue as correct and another person sees it as incorrect, you should see the values behind these viewpoints and be aware that this does not mean the other person is wrong.

(T1-SB)

From a pedagogical perspective, a teacher remarked on applying critical analysis of curriculum content rather than merely following the textbooks. He said when teaching lessons on democracy:

The discourse of textbooks emphasises the ideological orientation, for example, content about the superiority of the People’s Congress System. In fact, this is not the case when we teach … I will analyse the advantages and disadvantages of the separation of powers implemented by European and American countries and the advantages and disadvantages of our system … Others cannot be worthless, nor can ours be perfect. We should see both sides of the issue … On the one hand, it increases confidence in our democracy. On the other hand, they [students] know that others have merits, which can be borrowed, from the premise of not underestimating oneself.

(T1-SB)

Besides the competences for a globalized economy, the teachers believed that global perspectives also included attitudes such as open-mindedness, respect and tolerance to difference and care about the world. Teacher 2 at School B elaborated:

You [students] should have an open mind. You must not be closed-minded because today’s world is very open. You should at least have the willingness to get to know about other countries, other cultures and people’s lives. This is a fundamental attribute we want to educate our students with. Based on that, we hope you can learn to tolerate. The core of this value lies in that I may not agree with your opinions, lifestyle, beliefs or views on an issue, but I understand your position and your context, and I understand why you think it in a certain way based on your background.

(T2-SB)

According to some teachers, the cognizant and tolerance of differences can be cultivated in a domestic context, “because China is a country with very different regions and cultures, you can experience diversity at home [domestically] … It’s just that the concept of nation-state puts a boundary on the term … The essence is the communication and understanding between different regions, cultures, and people”. (T2-SA)

The participants cited caring about the world as having a sense of “community of shared future for humankind”, which implies a moral sense of belonging to humanity and a cooperative spirit to solve global problems. One teacher stated, “young people should learn to take responsibility to tackle the problems together … there would be no difference in nationality, race or ideological beliefs, it was only human and nature” (T3-SB). These values fall into the global awareness dimension in terms of the GCE model I propose. The participants’ understanding of global awareness included a general sense of humanity and responsibility to common good, but with untheorized and unsystematic interpretations.

Most teachers showed positive attitudes towards teaching global perspectives in the curriculum. For many participants, integrating global perspectives in their teaching was a natural approach, and teaching global citizenship does not have to be an explicit purpose. A teacher at School B explained:

This [instilling GCE] is not explicit. I don’t think I would bear in mind in every lesson how to infiltrate global citizenship [to students], because this is not a clear teaching objective for me. However, when you are teaching certain topics and knowledge, you may think that it is only reasonable to consider the problem in a global context, from a global perspective, to achieve the teaching objective you want. Otherwise, the topic is delivered too narrowly in scope.

(T1-SB)

When asked about global and national identity, most participants argued that there was no absolute conflict between the two layers of identity. Furthermore, their understanding included the notion of a developmental relation of multidimensional citizenship. Teacher 2 at School B said, “I think there is a citizen of the country before a citizen of the world, just like you need to know yourself before you know others … I first identify myself as a Shanghainese, then a Chinese citizen … and then a global citizen” (T2-SB). Besides having local and national identifications, the ability to take different layers of responsibilities is also seen as a developmental process. For example, a teacher believed, “If you cannot be a qualified national citizen, it may be difficult to be a global citizen, and you won’t have much chance to undertake those [big] responsibilities” (T1-SC).

Regarding the curriculum’s objective, all interviewed teachers agreed with the curriculum’s nation-building purpose of educating qualified citizens with a strong sense of national identity and confidence. Not much difference was found across schools. For most teachers, meeting the national needs was more important than including a global citizenship view. Teacher 1 at School A said:

When we teach a lesson, we first acknowledge national identity, including political identity. Political identity includes, firstly, the recognition of the socialist system; from this basis we then talk about communication with other countries.

(T1-SA)

However, the theoretical discussions about the multiple identities did not necessarily guide the teaching practice effectively. One teacher reported confusion regarding delivering global awareness under the unchangeable national purpose. Teacher 2 at School D shared her experience of a classroom discussion about the origin of the Dragon Boat Festival (in China or South Korea): she chose to set aside the dispute instead of conducting in-depth discussions in class because an exchange student from South Korea was present. This reveals the ambiguity in the definition of global citizenship and the unclear relationship between global and national citizenship and indicates a potential dilemma when dealing with relevant topics in class.

In conclusion, the study found that the subject Thought and Politics included global elements that contribute to preparing students with competence and awareness to be a certain kind of global citizen. Meanwhile, the GCE concepts were untheorized and unsystematic and whether the teachers attempted to transfer them into action is uncertain. Some teachers noticed the dilemma of teaching sensitive issues related to national identity and patriotic loyalty and found it difficult to address the issues in classrooms.

Discussion

The present study examined the global elements in Thought and Politics as it was considered the subject most relevant to GCE in China’s high school education. The study found global contents scattered in the curriculum and reflected in the teachers’ reproduction of the curriculum. The curriculum showed a tendency to cultivate global awareness derived from Confucianism, intertwined with the tendency to develop global competence driven by the nation’s economic needs.

Developing global awareness

The concepts of openness, respect for diverse cultures and values, and a sense of “community of shared future for humankind” in the curriculum show a moral global citizenship tendency that emphasizes the moral and ethical aspects of global citizenship (Oxley & Morris, 2013). The “community of shared future for humankind” emphasizes the cognizance of interconnectedness, mutual understanding and responsibility to the common good. The notion involves a sense of responsibility based on relationships derived from Confucian ethics. This notion echoed Parekh’s (2003) and Peterson’s (2020) concept of “globally oriented citizen”, in which human relationships come to the fore based on the concept of common humanity. According to Peterson’s (2020), the globally oriented citizen is “attentive to others, values human interaction with others and approaches such interactions with a commitment to reciprocity and solidarity” (p.43). The teachers’ conceptions of global citizenship resonate with these values. However, different from the individualistic concept of personhood in Western philosophical notions, the Chinese approach involves a deep-rooted collective identity (Choo, 2020). The notions of common interests and harmonious community connote a Confucian understanding of a relational concept of personal identity, “in which consciousness is innately other-directed and the self is formed through its interdependent relationship with others” (Choo, 2020, p. 28). In this sense, self-awareness is inseparable from social responsibility, and the moral cultivation of the individual is integrally connected with the cultivation of others in an ever-widening circle of relations (Choo, 2020). Therefore, global citizenship from a Confucian perspective emphasizes the mutual flourishing of both self and community.

However, these scattered notions and values of global awareness presented in the curriculum are unsystematic and untheorized. Under mainstream national education emphasizing patriotic and nationalistic values, the notions of global responsibility are marginalized and difficult to achieve. Most participants’ understanding remained at the level of acquiring “global awareness”, and whether the awareness of humanity translates into actions is unclear and less mentioned.

Developing global competence

The teachers stressed the need for students to recognize economic globalization’s impact on career development. This indicates an “international business training” view of global education (Myers, 2006) as preparing business leaders and workers for success in the global economy. Learning about the world is necessary because market competition is global, and companies are transnational. The finding aligns with existing research that GCE in the Chinese context is viewed as a recognition of the need for global knowledge and skills to compete in the global age (Goren & Yemini, 2017; Law, 2013).

Besides the individual level, the economic purpose reflects the state’s need to develop capacities for the global market. The discourse of global competence is seen in the political rhetoric. The national educational policy states, “to meet the requirement of opening up the Chinese economy and society to the world, large numbers of talents shall be cultivated that are imbued with global vision, well-versed in international rules, and capable of participating in international affairs and competition” (Ministry of Education, 2010, p. 34). The Belt and Road Initiative further emphasizes the development of human capital with the skills needed for the global knowledge economy (Bi, 2015). From state to individual levels, the discourse of developing global competence showed an expectation to achieve prosperity.

In western academia, scholars have critiqued the neoliberal forms of global citizenship associated with economic growth in that they build relationships, goals, and ways of living based on economic competitiveness, productivity, and prosperity, rather than on ideas of solidarity, common humanity and justice (Peterson, 2020). Through economic globalization, scholars worry that global citizenship is becoming a commodity to be valued and possessed. Although these critiques have been prevalent in western scholarship, the data in this study showed a positive side of globalization and economic global citizenship. The teachers primarily interpreted globalization as opening doors and creating broader set of relationships. Like Simon Marginson (in Bosio, 2022) noted, for some people, the word “global” has been about empowering and enabling, about mutual communication and cultural diversity, not about similarity in economics alone. For example, one of the global competences that the teachers emphasized is critical thinking, interpreted as independent thinking and the ability to make rational judgements based on different perspectives. The ability of independent and rational thinking represents one of the key attributes of modern citizenship formed alongside the development of liberal market and free competition. However, the Chinese people are generally considered lacking these abilities and independent personality, due to the long tradition of monarchy-subject political culture. As Ban and Tan (2015) noted, cultivating modern citizens with independent personality instead of chenmin (subjective personality, lacking rights and qualifications of civic subject) is one of the most important educational tasks in contemporary China. Therefore, developing global citizens in the Chinese context satisfies the task of cultivating modern citizens to a certain extent. This influence is considered to be associated with opening up to the world and joining the global economy and rules.

The complexity of global elements found in the curriculum and the conflicts between developing global competence and global awareness in the Chinese educational context reflect an objective to cultivate future-ready citizens with a mixture of requisite competences for the global economy and humanistic virtues needed for the good of the world. The global perspectives in China’s formal curriculum is more than simply meeting economic needs. This echoes Hird and Song’s (2018) view of “‘cosmopolitanism with Chinese characteristics’, which informs the influences by both traditional Chinese concepts and the complex processes of hybridity and negotiations between global and local discourses aligned with the state’s agenda of building a modern and cosmopolitan image of the country” (in Rizvi & Choo, 2020, p. 5). There has not been a systematic concept of global citizenship in the Chinese context and learning about the world has many purposes behind it. How the Chinese collective traditions and need for cultivating modern citizenship collide with the neoliberal notions brought about by economic globalization shapes the nature and possibility of global citizenship education in China. Further empirical studies are needed to clarify the interaction of these factors in teaching and learning practices.

Individual, national and global

As a nationalistic school subject, the task of Thought and Politics is to develop national and patriotic citizens, whereas the curriculum constructs the individual, national and global dimensions in certain ways, under which the subject teachers provided various understandings of multiple identities, which provokes the possibility of developing global citizenship. The following section tries to explain GCE elements in the curriculum from the discourse of multiple identities.

First, although the curriculum focuses on national citizenship education, developing global perspectives is regarded by the participants as an indispensable framing. The four modules explained knowledge and content related to China in economic, political, cultural, and philosophical areas within an international background. As a teacher noted, “The [logic of the] modules are based on China first, and then go out, looking at these issues from a global perspective” (T1-SB). Instead of taking global citizenship as a clear teaching goal, the teachers believed it was a quality gradually acquired by students in the process of developing analytical ability with a holistic view. In this case, global citizenship is a kind of thinking skill for students to adapt to live in a global community. In Yemini’s (2021) words, GCE is a way for learners to acquire a certain state of mind, which may imply a global oriented disposition.

Meanwhile, the participants’ conception of global citizenship includes an attitude to difference and diversity in all identity spheres. As mentioned in the findings, the teachers argued that understanding and respecting the cultural differences within China also contributes to being global citizens. The essence is communication and understanding between different regions, cultures and people. This echoed Audrey Osler’s cosmopolitan outlook that “education for cosmopolitan citizenship requires us to … recognize local communities and the national community as cosmopolitan … It implies a sense of solidarity with strangers in distant places but it also requires solidarity, a sense of shared humanity and dialogue with those in the local community and the national community whose perspectives may be very different from our own” (Osler, 2008, p. 22). Global citizenship in this sense goes beyond the relationship between national and global and emphasizes recognizing multiple identities and engaging with differences at various levels.

Furthermore, the participants considered the relationship between the individual, the nation and the world from a Confucian lens, where lies a progressive ethical requirement within these levels of identities, from self, family, nation, to the world (tianxia). The multiple identities are interrelated in a developmental way. The steps to better the world said in The Book of Rites, The Great Learning is: “correct thoughts with sincerity, cultivate the moral self, manage the family, govern the state and safeguard peace under Heaven”. Being a moral person and running a harmonious family are prerequisites to being a qualified national citizen; being a qualified national citizen is a prerequisite to cosmopolitan beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. This Confucian lens to some extent echoed Banks’s (2004) arguments that cultural, national and global identifications are interrelated in a developmental way. Developing a healthy attitude towards one’s cultural identity and group is prerequisite to positive and reflective attitudes towards other cultural, ethnic groups (Banks, 2004). The teachers believed that one should have enough recognition and understanding of one’s own country and culture to play a better role of global citizen. Therefore, although most teachers agreed with the curriculum’s purpose of national and patriotic education, they adopted a positive stance for developing global citizenship, regarding it as a higher moral goal for each person, which does not necessarily conflict with national citizenship.

Finally, as Peterson’s (2020) proposes, global citizenship should be understood by resorting to various background concepts and practices that impact on citizens, which in turn shape and define the nature and possibilities of global citizens. Exploring the possibility of cultivating global citizens in Chinese curricula requires understanding the relevant concepts in Chinese culture. But we should also keep sight of the notable absence of more critical themes of GCE in the Chinese curriculum, such as inequality in political power, social justice and human rights, and few contents regarding taking actions. The ability of critical and independent thinking is encouraged but not deep enough for what Nussbaum (2002, in Peterson, 2020) suggests, self-examination of one’s beliefs, values and traditions. With a strong national narrative, GCE elements remain rare and discussions about global issues are conservative in the curriculum, which can prevent the development of reflective national identification and the forming of global identity. For teachers, there has not been a comfortable and open environment to engage with critical and sensitive topics in class. Future studies are needed to investigate the possibility of GCE in China from these aspects.

Conclusion

This study explores the global elements and multiple meanings for GCE conceptualized in a national curriculum in China and how the teachers understand developing global citizens through the curriculum. The findings show explicit and implicit GCE elements scattered among the textbooks and teaching practices. While the curriculum emphasizes the moral sense of belonging to humanity and global responsibility, the explicit objective of developing global competences to achieve success on the world stage from individual and state levels dominates the discourse.

The conception of global citizenship as global awareness reflects a traditional Confucian concept of the world based on relationships, starting from one’s self-cultivation to achieving the world’s peace and stability, which contains a deep sense of collectivism. GCE as developing global competence implies China’s need for economic modernization accompanied by the task of cultivating modern citizens with world visions in the era of globalization. Moreover, the study shows Chinese understanding of citizenship constructs on the foundation of multiple identities. National and global identities are not necessarily in conflict but constitute layers of multiple identities. The completion of national identity, including responsibility, is the premise of becoming a citizen of the world.

Finally, the curriculum is found insufficient in encouraging more active citizenship engagement at the global level. The lack of structure and prioritization of GCE-related objectives and content can inhibit educators’ ability to understand and achieve the target. Accordingly, work needs to be done to increase the amount of content related to GCE in the compilation of teaching materials, the design of teaching activities and the selection of educational content in the secondary school curriculum.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Lipei Wang

Lipei Wang is a recent PhD graduate from Sydney School of Education and Social Work, the University of Sydney. Her research focuses on citizenship education and global citizenship education in the Chinese context, especially in secondary education.