Preparing social workers for global gaze: locating global citizenship within social work curricula

Abstract

Institutions of higher education have been particularly vulnerable to the pressures of globalization, resulting in policies and ensuing curricula that look to address the needs of students to be better prepared for living and working in a world in which global awareness, and perhaps even global identity, are requisites for success. Social work education is uniquely positioned to adapt its curricula for successful student outcomes in an increasingly globalized world. The challenges associated with social welfare, which have intensified under globalization, has been a long-standing concern of social work policy and practice. This article suggests strategies for integrating global citizenship education within social work studies, recognizing the affinities that exist between contemporary conceptualizations of global citizenship and social work practice. The article proposes four interrelated components that might be strategically implemented within existing social work curriculum, in consideration of the contextual ethos of the respective school of social work.

Full text

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION, 2016
VOL. 35, NO. 6, 632642
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2016.1190328
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
Preparing social workers for global gaze: locating global
citizenship within social work curricula
Paul Sherman
Family & Community Social Services Program, University of Guelph-Humber, Toronto, Canada
ABSTRACT
Institutions of higher education have been particularly vulnerable
to the pressures of globalization, resulting in policies and ensuing
curricula that look to address the needs of students to be better
prepared for living and working in a world in which global awareness,
and perhaps even global identity, are requisites for success. Social
work education is uniquely positioned to adapt its curricula for
successful student outcomes in an increasingly globalized world.
The challenges associated with social welfare, which have intensied
under globalization, has been a long-standing concern of social work
policy and practice. This article suggests strategies for integrating
global citizenship education within social work studies, recognizing
the anities that exist between contemporary conceptualizations of
global citizenship and social work practice. The article proposes four
interrelated components that might be strategically implemented
within existing social work curriculum, in consideration of the
contextual ethos of the respective school of social work.
Introduction
Globalization has sparked a renewed interest in exploring contemporary approaches to
social work, where practitioners are called upon to work with individuals, families and com
-
munities impacted by a phenomenon that ‘disrupts the social and economic arrangements
of society and is erosive of existing arrangements of welfare’ (Pugh & Gould, 2000, p. 125).
Held (2010, p. 29) summarizes globalization as ‘the widening, intensifying, speeding up and
growing impact of worldwide interconnectedness’. Osler and Starkey (2003) characterize it
as a process that leaves not one person so isolated – regardless of where they may reside –
that their life is not in some way inuenced by events taking place in another distant part
of the world. As the impact of globalization has rendered the planet a more deeply interre-
lated place, where, in the words of Held (2010, p. 36), ‘the fates of nations are signicantly
entwined’, the notion of global citizenship has surfaced as one response to navigating an
increasingly interdependent world.
It is well noted in the literature that globalization has impacted higher education policy
and curricula worldwide. Over the past few decades, colleges and universities around the
world have been increasingly focussed on new internationalization agendas and activities,
KEYWORDS
Globalization; global
citizenship; social work
curriculum; higher education
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 23 December 2015
Accepted 11 May 2016
CONTACT Paul Sherman paul.sherman@guelphhumber.ca

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 633
largely driven by the forces of globalization (Fanghanel & Cousin, 2012; Hanson, 2010;
Khoo, 2011; Maringe, 2012). Post-secondary educational institutions are re-examining their
policies and practices in response to globalization with respect to workplace skills required
by graduates (Sperandio, Grudzinski-Hall, & Stewart-Gambino, 2010), the international-
izing of education (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013a) and the introduction of world citi-
zenship education (So, Lee, Park, & Kang, 2014). Strategies and ensuing curricula are being
explored that address the needs of students to be better prepared for living and working in a
world in which global awareness, and perhaps even global identity, are requisites for success.
Arnot (2009) sees modern educational reform – with its new agenda variously referred
to as global education, global citizenship education or cosmopolitanism—as encouraging
the acquisition of global gaze. According to Hendershot and Sperandio (2009), globaliza-
tion has made it necessary for the international community to adopt practices of univer-
sal moral imperatives and to rethink the practice of global citizenship. Ong (as cited in
Ladson-Billings, 2005, p. 74) contends that the forces of globalization have created a new
kind of citizen, unfettered by geopolitical boundaries and national loyalties, who are being
transformed into exible citizens by developing multiple transnational allegiances.
Social work education is uniquely situated to adapt its curricula to accommodate the
needs of its students in preparing for the eects of globalization, particularly in view of
the discipline’s scope of practice as dened by its three principal levels of engagement;
micro, mezzo and macro. e challenges associated with social welfare, which have inten-
sied under globalization in both local and global environments, has been a long-standing
concern of social work policy and practice. e Canadian Association of Social Workers’
(CASW, 2005, p. 3) Code of Ethics states that the social work profession has ‘a particular
interest in the needs and empowerment of people who are vulnerable, oppressed, and/or
living in poverty’. In order for social workers to ‘understand the forces of globalization [and]
to represent themselves in an informed fashion in international circles’ (Hare, 2004, p. 408),
social work students would be well served by a curriculum that promotes global awareness
and introduces students to the notion of global citizenship.
Although the inclusion of international perspectives in social work education has had a
relatively lengthy history, social work research literature acknowledges that greater attention
is needed concerning the impact of globalization. Hawkins and Knox (2014, p. 248) sug-
gest ‘a pressing need is to integrate social work education, globalization, and human rights
into a framework of human rights leadership that will guide practice in the twenty-rst
century’. My contention is that locating global awareness and global citizenship identi-
cation within social work studies would position social workers to enhance their practice
on both a local and international scale. As intercultural diversity and connectivity become
increasingly commonplace on the transnational stage, social workers are being called upon
to address issues of social justice and human rights in both the local and international
arenas. Social work practitioners ostensibly working in local communities are witnessing
the intersection of more salient global sociological challenges, requiring approaches that
consider an international perspective. Khan and Dominelli (2000) have observed that glo-
balization has contributed to the internationalization of social issues, and social workers
are increasingly required to address challenges that transcend national boundaries. Issues
such as international human tracking, child pornography and sexual exploitation, drug
tracking, international child adoption, and increased family tensions and mental health
challenges presented by refugees who have suered trauma in their country of origin (Khan

634 P. SHERMAN
& Dominelli, 2000; Lyons, 2006) are accelerating many aspects of social work practice from
the global to the local. Social Work education, therefore, would be well served by including
elements of global citizenship education that are aligned with the principles and practices
of the profession.
is article begins by exploring conceptualizations of global citizenship in order to locate
it within the context of social work education. Two distinct approaches to global citizenship
education with relevancy to social work are presented before introducing components and
strategies for integrating global citizenship within existing social work curricula.
Contemporary conceptualizations of global citizenship
Global citizenship has been frequently associated with an understanding and apprecia-
tion for cultural diversity (Cliord & Montgomery, 2014; Hendershot & Sperandio, 2009;
Karlberg, 2008; Nussbaum, 1997; Snider, Reysen, & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). Knowledge
of other cultures, and in many respects, participation in multicultural exchanges, are seen
as crucial to one’s identication and active engagement as a global citizen. Hendershot and
Sperandio (2009) surveyed students from their university’s Global Citizenship Programme
for perceptions of what it means to be a global citizen. emes such as open-mindedness
and accepting of other cultures, as well as being tolerant and non-judgemental, were prom-
inent amongst the student responses. Nussbaum (1997, p. 68) believes that, ‘Awareness of
cultural dierence is essential in order to promote the respect for another that is the essential
underpinning for dialogue’. A respectful attitude means to presume that value exists in all
cultural contexts for nding meaning and identity in that culture (Haydon, 2006).
Global citizenship has also been identied as the recognition of global inter-connect-
edness and shared bonds among human beings, and with the environment (Ikeda, 2010;
Khoo, 2011; Noddings, 2005; Obelleiro, 2012; Pallas, 2012; Sperandio et al., 2010). Schattle’s
(2008, p. 39) study of 157 individuals who self-identify as global citizens indicates that
responsible global citizenship ‘emphasize[s] both moral accountability and solidarity toward
all life on the planet’. In advocating for a ‘new humanism’, Bokova (2010, p. 5) stresses that
‘an accomplished human being is one who recognizes coexistence and equality with all
others, however far away, and who strives to nd a way to live with them’. In this regard,
accomplished human beings share a common trait with global citizens, who in Noddings
(2005, p. 11) view, ‘consider the eects of life in one locality on the lives and well-being of
distant others’. Nussbaum (1997) contends that an essential criterion for the cultivation of
one’s humanity is to appreciate that ‘human beings [are] bound to all other human beings
by ties of recognition and concern’.
Additionally, global citizenship has been linked to an increased awareness and belief
in social justice and respect for human rights (Burgess, Reimer-Kirkham, & Astle, 2014;
Gibson, Rimmington, & Landwehr-Brown, 2008; Martin, Smolen, Oswald, & Milam, 2012;
Osler & Starkey, 2003; Pallas, 2012). Gibson et al. (2008, p. 17) note that global citizenship
entails responsibilities that ‘require an attitude of respect for the rights of others and actions
that are just for all’, while Karlberg (2008) comments that global citizenship can play a sig-
nicant role in creating a more peaceful and just society. Chickering and Braskamp’s (2009)
study of 245 undergraduate study abroad students reports that a number of students showed
signicant developmental gains in their perspective on social justice.

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 635
Other research has reported on pro-social global citizenship practices such as altruism,
empathy and caring for the welfare of others outside one’s cultural group (Brunell, 2013;
Ikeda, 2010; Noddings, 2005; Nussbaum, 1997; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013a), in addi-
tion to taking responsibility for one’s actions and the impact these behaviours might have
on global concerns (Gibson et al., 2008; Obelleiro, 2012; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013b;
Snider et al., 2013). Bourke, Bamber and Lyons (2012) report on a meta-analysis study
demonstrating that the strongest predictors of engaging in citizenship activities were one’s
levels of conscientiousness, empathy and helpfulness. Brunell (2013) writes about global
citizenship education fostering a sense of moral responsibility for global problems and the
persons who suer from these challenges. Most importantly though, is the development of
a sense of empowerment to engage in activities to improve the lives of others most aected
by global problems. Ikeda (2010, p. 112) reects on an essential element of global citizen-
ship being, ‘e compassion to maintain an imaginative empathy that reaches beyond
one’s immediate surroundings and extends to those suering in distant places’. Likewise,
Nussbaum’s (2002) writes,
e moral imagination can oen become lazy, according sympathy to the near and the familiar,
but refusing it to people who look dierent. Enlisting students’ sympathy for distant lives is
thus a way of training, so to speak, the muscles of the imagination.
Lastly, the literature notes that knowledge and awareness of self in relation to others, as
well as critical self-reection, are important characteristics of global citizenship (Cliord &
Montgomery, 2014; Hendershot & Sperandio, 2009; Nussbaum, 1997). Nussbaum (2007, p. 38),
for example, comments on ‘the capacity for Socratic self-criticism and critical thought about
one’s own traditions’, as a crucial element for engaged citizenship in a pluralistic, democratic
and globalized world. Lilley, Barker and Harris (2015) conducted interviews with 26 higher
education experts located in Australia and the European Union for the purpose of exploring
how universities address ethical thinking and global citizenship. By analysing themes from
the interviews, the authors developed a prole of a ‘global citizen mindset’, which included
transformative thinking, imagining other perspectives, reexivity in questioning assump-
tions, thinking as the ‘other’, and engaging in critical and ethical thinking.
In summarizing conceptualizations of global citizenship, it is most typically understood
as an orientation toward an appreciation for the worldwide interconnection of human
beings, a respect for cultural diversity and human rights, a commitment to global social
justice, a sensitivity to the suering of people around the world, an ability to see the world
as others see it, and a felt duty to take responsibility for one’s own actions and on behalf
of others.
Education for global citizenship
Engaging students in global citizenship education is premised on the understanding that
when students are educated to be informed, responsible and competent, they will then
possess the requisite knowledge and skill capabilities for actively participating in an inter-
dependent and multicultural world (Lorenzini, 2013). Bourke et al. (2012) make a useful
distinction for conceptualizing global citizenship education by comparing education about
global citizenship with education for global citizenship. When examining educational prac-
tices about global citizenship, we see that it typically entails a methodology that exclusively
provides students with an understanding of global issues, cultures and institutions. is

636 P. SHERMAN
approach is primarily aimed at aording students a sense of identication, connection and
potential solidarity with others around the world. By contrast, education for global citi-
zenship is intended to ‘ensure students are ready to take on the role of adult global citizens
and associated responsibilities’ (Bourke et al., 2012, p. 163). is process encompasses a
more robust pedagogy that involves students integrating applicable skills, values and atti-
tudes germane to engaging as global citizens; an important distinction when exploring the
introduction of curricula that targets the acquisition of practical knowledge and experience.
Oxfam’s learn-think-act process for global citizenship education
Oxfam International has developed a fairly comprehensive curriculum for global citizenship
education. Although targeted for the early years to late adolescence, their framework provides
useful insights for higher education curricula. Oxfam (n.d.) recommends an educational pro-
cess called Learn-ink-Act, which ostensibly sees learners initially exploring topics related to
social justice, diversity and sustainable development by considering the issues from dierent
points of view. Students are then asked to critically examine what can be done about the issue,
relating possible solutions to values, worldviews, power, and action. e third component in
this process involves contemplating and taking action on the issue as an active global citizen,
both individually and collectively. is last component, i.e. reecting upon and responding to
an issue under study is critical to the process of education for global citizenship as it facilitates
identication and subsequent involvement as a global citizen. Regardless of the arena, the
process of social change requires commitment and action.
Oxfam International (2006) further identies three key elements of education for respon-
sible global citizenship – knowledge and understanding, skills and values and attitudes.
Oxfam’s progressive and holistic programme is well aligned with a cosmopolitanism ori-
entation for active global citizenship engagement. It emphasizes using education to furnish
students with attitudes and abilities resonant with many of the attributes of cosmopolitanism
and global citizenship identied previously, such as understanding the interrelatedness
of human beings with each other and to their natural environment, and critical thinking
and awareness of global issues. Additionally, at various points in the curriculum there is
an emphasis on developing awareness and appreciation of diversity and multiculturalism,
social justice and human rights, empathy and compassion, sustainable development and
responsible action. ese issues have a high anity with social work’s values and practices,
as evidenced by the following excerpt from the International Federation of Social Workers’
(ISFW) and the International Association of Schools of Social Work’s (IASSW) joint de-
nition of global social work; ‘Principles of social justice, human rights, collective respon-
sibility and respect for diversities are central to social work... social work engages people
and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing’ (International Federation
of Social Workers [ISFW], 2015, para. 2).
Soka education’s approach to global citizenship
e Soka Education school system, originating in Japan, includes educational institutions
from primary level to higher education in eight countries. Although its two universities
(located in Tokyo and Los Angeles) do not deliver social work programmes, Soka education’s
model provides useful insights for integrating a global citizenship approach within social

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 637
work education. Both social work and Soka education are concerned with the promotion
of well-being and advocacy for social justice. Merry and de Ruyter (2011) argue that edu-
cation needs to stress the development of essential character attributes such as empathy
and dialogue across cultural dierence, and the attitude required to challenge injustice. As
with social work, Soka education’s philosophical underpinnings and practices are keenly
aliated with the welfare of both the individual and society as a whole (Kumagai, 2000),
and its paramount aim is the development of people of character, who are committed to
the ideals of peace and the sanctity of life (Goulah, 2012).
Japanese educator and founder of Soka education, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871–1944)
placed great emphasis on the importance of education for human development. He believed
that a key purpose of education was to cultivate global-minded individuals who could be
empathetically engaged with the world, while at the same time maintain their roots at
the local community level (Gebert & George, 2000). Daisaku Ikeda, founder of the Soka
Education School System, has carried on the Makiguchian tradition with his establishment
of an educational system that emphasizes the importance of global citizenship through its
philosophy and pedagogical practices. Embedded in the mission statement of the Soka
schools is the following declaration; ‘Our system places the highest importance of [sic]
fostering global citizens, men and women who are committed to the cause of peace and
will assume positive roles in the international community’ (Soka University, 2014, para. 7).
Ikeda (2010, p. 112) elucidates the three pillars of global citizenship as;
• e wisdom to perceive the interconnectedness of all life and living;
• e courage not to fear or deny dierence, but to respect and strive to understand
people of dierent cultures and to grow from encounters with them;
• e compassion to maintain an imaginative empathy that reaches beyond one’s imme-
diate surroundings and extends to those suering in distant places.
rough its core values regarding the purpose of education and its beliefs about the
interconnectedness of life, Soka education can be regarded as a useful model for the edu-
cation of globally responsible students. Soka University’s emphasis on cultural exchange,
secondary language learning and study abroad, would be worth examining when intro-
ducing educational programming for social work based on a global citizenship approach
to practice. For example, Soka sees the study abroad platform as an important gateway to
learning practical communication skills and cross-cultural understanding through expo-
sure to indigenous cultures and values in the students’ country of study. Students who
encounter experiential learning through study abroad discover rsthand how to survive
in a global context (Soka University, 1997–2013, para. 3). Recent studies report that study
abroad programs in higher education are likely to encourage participants’ self-reection
and perspective shis (Stoner, Perry, Wadsworth, Stoner, & Tarrant, 2014; Stoner, Tarrant,
et al., 2014; Tarrant, Rubin, & Stoner, 2014). Stoner, Tarrant, et al. (2014) comment that
the combination of international experiences and critical reection provides a signicant
platform for nurturing global citizenship.
Integrating global citizenship within social work education
In this Section, I articulate four aspects of global citizenship education that could enhance
social work studies: (1) endorsement of prosocial values and behaviours, (2) local and global

638 P. SHERMAN
practical knowledge acquisition and experience, (3) awareness and understanding of global
issues and (4) applied self-reection in a globalized world. ese four areas of curriculum
enrichment are not mutually exclusive, and in fact, there are necessary intersections between
any or all of them. In proposing these components, I have borrowed from Krumer-Nevo,
Weiss-Gai, and Monnickendam’s (2009) tripartite strategy for integrating a new or revised
framework within existing curricula. Implementing global citizenship education within
social work curricula could be implemented using the following strategies; (1) integration
of substantive study about global citizenship within existing social work courses, (2) intro-
duction of specic courses on global citizenship relative to social work practice, and (3)
development of a unique concentration within the social work programme that specializes in
global citizenship. ese three strategies could be implemented either separately or together,
relative to the context of the respective social work school.
Endorsement of prosocial values and behaviours
Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013b) suggest there is a predictive relationship between global
citizenship identity and endorsement of prosocial values and behaviour (e.g. empathy, valuing
diversity, social justice and helping others). Most social work schools currently introduce
coursework that involves theory and practice in empathy, valuing diversity, advocating for
social justice, and helping others. It would be important, however, to introduce (or fortify)
coursework that focuses on other equally important prosocial values, such as the promotion
and advocacy of environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is worthy of a
great deal more attention than most social work curricula current devote to this topic.
A curriculum that strengthens social work students’ internalization of prosocial values
and behaviours, such as those values identied above, is one that is in a better position
to prepare students for identication and engagement as global citizens, and as eective
practitioners in a globalized society.
Local and global practical knowledge acquisition and experience
According to Ife (2001), because globalization impacts the entirety of human experience,
all social work practice is to be considered international in its scope, and the task of social
workers is to link the global with the local. Hawkins and Knox (2014) assert that all social
workers are obligated to engage in global citizenship, also noting that a key aspect of this
approach is to help students to connect the local and the global.
Social work education is well known for its abundant use of local eld placements to pro-
vide students with hands-on experience that aims to connect theory with practice. Typically,
but not necessarily, these placements are located in the student’s wider community, and
usually situated in one of the many non-prot organizations that comprise the continuum
of human service agencies. e focus is on the student gaining invaluable local practical
knowledge and experience in the course of developing their competencies and skill set for
working as social work practitioners.
A global citizenship enhanced curriculum would see students expand their practical
knowledge acquisition and experience in two ways. e rst scenario would provide oppor-
tunities for students to engage in eld studies with community-based organizations that
work with local populations impacted by globalization and global issues, such as poverty,

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 639
homelessness, illiteracy and transnational migration. A second approach would see students
engage in eld placement work with any number of international agencies (e.g., Oxfam,
Greenpeace, World Vision) that locate oces within travelling distance for the student.
Students working in these community-based and international-based agencies would have
opportunities to be equipped with knowledge and skills to more fully understand how global
issues can impact on local environments (and vice versa), and to work with individuals,
families and communities where global and local issues intersect.
Study abroad experiences are seen as crucial vehicles for helping students acquire practical
knowledge and experience. Sperandio et al. (2010, p. 16) argue that, ‘students’ global engage-
ment must begin with leaving the protective walls of the university’. Learning to be active global
citizens requires students to not only utilize the traditional third-party educational resources
available to them, such as textbooks, the Internet and the arts and literature, but to actively
engage with and experience other cultures. It is suggested that eldwork involving a study
abroad component be mandatory within a social work curriculum that aims at infusing global
citizenship education. Notwithstanding the level of complexity (inter alia nancial arrange-
ments) that may be involved in accessing study abroad eld placements, eorts could be made
to secure these arrangements for senior level students. Aside from gaining valuable knowl-
edge and experience that is oen far removed from the student’s own traditions and culture,
this platform is an excellent opportunity to test the degree of internalization of one’s learned
prosocial values, as well as to experience how global and local social issues interconnect.
Awareness of global issues
Reysen and Katzarska-Miller ‘s (2013b) ndings suggest that global awareness is an anteced-
ent to global citizenship identity. erefore, exposing students to the study of the complex
global challenges facing humanity would enhance students’ identication and potential
engagement as global citizens. Such issues as poverty, human rights, access to education and
gender equality are typically included in most social work curricula, however, for the most
part these issues are compartmentalized and seen through the lens of the student’s local
environment. Examining the vast array of global issues aecting the world’s population,
and helping students understand how global and local issues interrelate, would yield a more
globally minded practitioner. For example, most social work students understand poverty as
a condition of marginalization that largely aects the unemployed or underemployed. is
is a supercial and limited view of poverty and does not necessarily help students adequately
understand the overarching global aspects of poverty-related issues, such as food security,
oppression, nutrition and other health-related issues.
Applied self-reection in a globalized world
Social work education encourages students to critically examine their own beliefs and atti-
tudes, cultural and family traditions and views of social justice, in order to address the
concerns of others in a professional and objective manner. Applied self-reection, however,
goes further by asking students not just to think about their place in a globalized world,
but to also explore actions they might take to address global social issues, as per Oxfam’s
global citizenship education strategy. Hansen’s (2014, p. 11) notion of educational cosmo-
politanism sees reective learning as a function of all experiences encountered in life and,

640 P. SHERMAN
‘implies being open reectively to new persons, ideas, values, and practices’. Exposure to
critical global issues and global citizenship values and behaviour, from both theory-driven
coursework and experiential learning, would stimulate students to ‘think deeply about their
actions, develop an awareness of why their actions are important, and discover other ways
to become active and responsible global citizens’ (Martin et al., 2012, p. 163).
Conclusion
In this article, I present some ideas for introducing global citizenship into social work
education. Global citizenship can be viewed as an acknowledgement of universal values,
such as, respect for cultural diversity, human rights and social justice, interconnectedness
of life, empathy for others and a felt responsibility to act. Global citizenship identication
is contemplative and action-oriented.
Focusing on social change and the promotion of social justice, human rights, respect for
diversity and self-determination, the academic discipline of social work is well positioned
to integrate global citizenship into its curricula. is article accentuates endorsement of
prosocial values and behaviours, practical knowledge acquisition and experience, global
issues awareness and understanding and applied self-reection in a globalized world as
particularly meaningful aspects of global citizenship education that should be integrated
within social work curricula. It is recognized that these components are very much inter-
related, and can be strategically implemented into existing curriculum, in consideration of
the contextual ethos of the respective school of social work.
Locating global citizenship within social work education promotes education for global
citizenship, rather than about global citizenship. is distinction recognizes the dynamic
role of social work in addressing challenges at the micro, mezzo and macro levels of society.
Social workers identifying as global citizens may be more capably equipped in our globalized
world to address life challenges and take meaningful action to enhance well-being within
the wider scope of society.
Acknowledgements
e author wishes to acknowledge the support of the Department of Educational Research, Lancaster
University, U.K., and to thank Dr. Jan McArthur, Lancaster University for her helpful critique of the
dra article.
ORCID
Paul Sherman http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5459-5992
References
Arnot, M. (2009). A global conscience collective? Incorporating gender injustices into global
citizenship education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4, 117–132.
Bokova, I. (2010). A new humanism for the 21st century. Adapted from an address delivered in Milan
(Italy) on October 7, 2010. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001897/189775e.
pdf
Bourke, L., Bamber, P., & Lyons, M. (2012). Global citizens: Who are they? Education, Citizenship
and Social Justice, 7, 161–174.

SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION 641
Brunell, L. A. (2013). Building global citizenship: Engaging global issues, practicing civic skills. Journal
of Political Science Education, 9, 16–33.
Burgess, C. A., Reimer-Kirkham, S., & Astle, B. (2014). Motivation and international clinical
placements: Shiing nursing students to a global citizenship perspective. International Journal of
Nursing Education Scholarship, 11(1), 1–8.
Canadian Association of Social Workers. (2005). Code of ethics. Retrieved from http://casw-acts.ca/
sites/default/les/attachements/CASW_Code%20of%20Ethics.pdf
Chickering, A., & Braskamp, L. A. (2009). Developing a global perspective for personal and social
responsibility. Peer Review, AAC&U, Fall, 27–30.
Cliord, V., & Montgomery, C. (2014). Challenging conceptions of western higher education and
promoting graduates as global citizens. Higher Education Quarterly, 68, 28–45.
Fanghanel, J., & Cousin, G. (2012). ‘Worldly’ pedagogy: A way of conceptualising teaching towards
global citizenship. Teaching in Higher Education, 17, 39–50.
Gebert, A., & George, A. (2000, August). Tsunesaburo Makiguchi: Founder of Soka value-creating
education. Living Buddhism, 18–30.
Gibson, K. L., Rimmington, G. M., & Landwehr-Brown, M. (2008). Developing global awareness and
responsible world citizenship with global learning. Roeper Review, 30, 11–23.
Goulah, J. (2012). Daisaku Ikeda and value-creative dialogue: A new current in inter-culturalism and
educational philosophy. Educational Philosophy and eory, 44, 997–1009.
Hansen, D. T. (2014). Cosmopolitanism as cultural creativity: New modes of educational practice in
globalizing times. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(1), 1–14.
Hanson, L. (2010). Global citizenship, global health, and the internationalization of curriculum.
Journal of Studies in International Education., 14, 70–88.
Hare, I. (2004). Dening social work for the 21st century. International Social Work, 47, 407–424.
Hawkins, C. A., & Knox, K. (2014). Educating for international social work: Human rights leadership.
International Social Work, 57, 248–257.
Haydon, G. (2006). Respect for persons and for cultures as a basis for national and global citizenship.
Journal of Moral Education, 35, 457–471.
Held, D. (2010). Cosmopolitanism: Ideals and realities. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hendershot, K., & Sperandio, J. (2009). Study abroad and development of global citizen identity
and cosmopolitan ideals in undergraduates. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 12, 45–55.
Ife, J. (2001). Local and global practice: Relocating social work as a human rights profession in the
new global order. European Journal of Social Work, 4, 5–15.
Ikeda, D. (2010). Soka education: For the happiness of the individual. Santa Monica, CA: Middleway
Press.
International Federation of Social Workers. (2015). Global denition of social work. Retrieved from
http://ifsw.org/policies/denition-of-social-work/
Karlberg, M. (2008). Discourse, identity, and global citizenship. Peace Review: A Journal of Social
Justice, 20, 310–320.
Khan, P., & Dominelli, L. (2000). e impact of globalization on social work in the UK. European
Journal of Social Work, 3, 95–108.
Khoo, S. (2011). Ethical globalisation or privileged internationalisation? Exploring global citizenship
and internationalisation in Irish and Canadian universities. Globalisation, Societies and Education,
9, 337–353.
Krumer-Nevo, M., Weiss-Gai, I., & Monnickendam, M. (2009). Poverty-aware social work practice:
A conceptual framework for social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 5, 225–242.
Kumagai, K. (2000). Value-creating pedagogy and Japanese education in the modern era. Ideas and
inuence of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi: Special Issue of the Journal of Oriental Studies, 10. Retrieved
from www.iop.or.jp/0010s/kumagai.pdf
Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). Diering concepts of citizenship: Schools and communities as sites of
civic development. In N. Noddings (Ed.), Educating citizens for global awareness (pp. 69–80). New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Lilley, K., Barker, M., & Harris, N. (2015). Educating global citizens: A good ‘idea’ or an organizational
practice? Higher Education Research & Development, 34, 957–971.

642 P. SHERMAN
Lorenzini, M. (2013). From global knowledge to global civic engagement. Journal of Political Science
Education, 9, 417–435.
Lyons, K. (2006). Globalization and social work: International and local implications. British Journal
of Social Work, 36, 365–380.
Maringe, F. (2012). e meanings of globalization and internationalization in HE: Findings from a
world survey. In F. Maringe & N. Foskett (Eds.), Globalization and internationalization in higher
education (pp. 17–34). London: Continuum.
Martin, L. A., Smolen, L. A., Oswald, R. A., & Milam, J. L. (2012). Preparing students for global
citizenship in the twenty-rst century: Integrating social justice through global literature. e
Social Studies, 103, 158–164.
Merry, M. S., & de Ruyter, D. J. (2011). e relevance of cosmopolitanism for moral education. Journal
of Moral Education, 40(1), 1–18.
Noddings, N. (2005). Global citizenship: Promises and problems. In N. Noddings (Ed.), Educating
citizens for global awareness (pp. 1–21). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in liberal education.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2002). Education for citizenship in an era of global connection. Studies in Philosophy
and Education, 21, 289–303.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2007). Cultivating humanity and world citizenship. Excerpted from Forum futures
2007, forum for the future of higher education, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from http://net.educause.
edu/ir/library/pdf/0709s.pdf
Obelleiro, G. (2012). A moral cosmopolitan perspective on language education. Critical Inquiry in
Language Studies, 9, 33–59.
Osler, A., & Starkey, H. (2003). Learning for cosmopolitan citizenship: eoretical debates and young
people's experiences. Educational Review, 55, 243–254.
Oxfam. (n.d.). Oxfam education: Global citizenship. Retrieved from http://www.oxfam.org.uk/
education/global-citizenship
Oxfam International. (2006). Education for global citizenship: A guide for schools. Oxfam House:
Oxfam Development Education Program.
Pallas, C. L. (2012). Identity, individualism, and activism beyond the state: Examining the impacts
of global citizenship. Global Society, 26, 169–189.
Pugh, R., & Gould, N. (2000). Globalization, social work, and social welfare. European Journal of
Social Work, 3, 123–138.
Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013a). Student pathways to global citizenship. In C. Boyle (Ed.),
Student learning: Improving practice (pp. 122–137). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013b). A model of global citizenship: Antecedents and outcomes.
International Journal of Psychology, 48, 858–870.
Schattle, H. (2008). e practices of global citizenship. Plymouth: Rowman & Litttleeld.
Snider, J. S., Reysen, S., & Katzarska-Miller, I. (2013). How we frame the message of globalization
matters. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 1599–1607.
So, K., Lee, S., Park, J., & Kang, J. (2014). e idea of cosmopolitanism in Korea’s national curriculum.
Asia Pacic Journal of Education, 34(1), 1–14.
Soka University. (1997–2013). Faculty of international liberal arts: Program features. Retrieved from
http://la.soka.ac.jp/en/feature.html
Soka University. (2014). Soka school system mission statement. Retrieved from http://www.soka.ac.jp/
en/about/philosophy/mission
Sperandio, J., Grudzinski-Hall, M., & Stewart-Gambino, H. (2010). Developing an undergraduate
global citizenship program: Challenges of denition and assessment. International Journal of
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 22, 12–22.
Stoner, L., Perry, L., Wadsworth, D., Stoner, K. R., & Tarrant, M. A. (2014). Global citizenship is key
to securing global health: e role of higher education. Preventive Medicine, 64, 126–128.
Stoner, K. R., Tarrant, M. A., Perry, L., Stoner, L., Wearing, S., & Lyons, K. (2014). Global citizenship
as a learning outcome of educational travel. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 14, 149–163.
Tarrant, M. A., Rubin, D. L., & Stoner, L. (2014). e added value of study abroad: Fostering a global
citizenry. Journal of Studies in International Education, 18, 141–161.