Choo, Suzanne S.

All over the world, governments and policymakers continue to proclaim the need to educate students for the 21st century. In this study, we argue that the impetus for 21st century education should be more accurately termed, 21st century global education which refers to education that seeks to equip students with the knowledge, skills, and sensitivities to compete and navigate the challenges caused by globalization in the 21st century. Based on this initial definition, we examine three theoretical models that may inform the conceptualization and enactment of 21st century global education in schools.
The first model is Human Capital Theory (HCT) which focuses on economic globalization resulting in economic reasoning used to justify policy initiatives and reform. HCT reinforces economic utilitarianism resulting in educational goals prioritizing the teaching of competencies. The second model is the Human Capabilities Approach (HCA) that emphasizes the importance of the intrinsic goods of education (as opposed to its mere instrumental utility). HCA argues that the development of human well-being is deemed the highest end which individuals should seek to attain and which government and public policies should be directed towards. HCA draws attention to the ends of education centred on the development of capabilities to support human flourishing, which involve opportunities for individuals to pursue what they value, freedom to choose among the opportunities given, and agency to construct one’s goals and values. The third model the Cosmopolitan Capacities Approach (CCA) is an extension of HCA. CCA is premised on the philosophy of ethical cosmopolitanism entailing questions about what it means to equip students as cosmopolitans or citizens of the world. CCA perceives that capabilities should not merely foster an individual’s well-being but that in doing so, the individual is then empowered to use his knowledge and skills to empower others. Thus, CCA focuses on the ends of cultivating capacities which denotes the ability or power to perceive, understand, empathize with and defend or find solutions to addressing the concerns of others.

The shift in multimodality and multiliteracies in the English curriculum has become more a need than a choice. With the advent of ‘new’ media and advancing technology, learning scopes have broadened significantly. Methodologies and pedagogies will have to be redefined and re-established to accommodate the over-flowing sources of accessible knowledge. The main issue is that schools and universities, as Hull and Nelson (2005) argued, are still “staunchly logocentric, book centered, and essay driven” (p.225). More than a decade after this assertion, these new forms of literacies appear to have some impact on teaching and learning. However, the inclusion of multimodal text analyses in school-based assessment seems to be lagging. This paper discusses the shift towards multimodality and multiliteracies and their possible impact and implications on the English curriculum. It proposes the alignment of a re-conceptualized English curriculum which infuses the teaching and learning of visuals and technology and the assessment of multimodal texts.

This study seeks to examine the challenges and opportunities faced by schools in facilitating cosmopolitan dispositions or virtues in their students, in particular, through literature lessons. The project is driven by three key research questions:

1. What forms of cosmopolitan dispositions are observed in students in literature classrooms and in sample assignments in the selected schools?
2. How do literary texts develop cosmopolitan dispositions in the teaching of literature in the selected schools?
3. How pedagogical approaches do teachers employ to develop cosmopolitan dispositions in the teaching of literature in the selected schools?

Countering the drive to erect walls between nations and communities, the burden is increasingly on educators to develop in students essential skills and dispositions for a more hospitable future. Global education is essentially aimed at addressing the realities of increasingly networked societies and porous exchanges of knowledge, capital, and products among people and groups around the world. This paper examines how global education is enacted in two schools in Singapore and the United States. Given that a central characteristic of the twenty-first century is globalization, global education is inevitably embedded in the discourse of twenty-first century competencies utilized by policymakers worldwide. However, while global education has typically been studied as a singular subject such as Human Rights or integrated into History, Social Studies, or Civics Education, this study differs as it examines two schools that have adopted a whole-school approach to global education. That is, global education is embedded in the culture of schooling and infused across curricula subjects. The first part of the paper provides an overview of global education and its two key emphases – globalism and global citizenship. The second part discusses the tensions emerging from observations of global education in the two schools.

In an age of hyper-globalization, ethical criticism has become vital in tackling the bombardment of information across networked societies. This paper begins by exploring the historical emergence of ethical criticism, its dominant approaches (relational, analytical and historical), and potential for character education. Next, we focus on character education in Singapore. Utilizing a comparative case study analysis, we compared older and recent character education syllabi and applied ethical criticism as an analytical lens. Findings show a discernible shift from moral adaptation to some evidence of ethical criticism where more emphasis is placed on the relational and less on analytical and historical aspects. We then examine the opportunities and tensions for ethical criticism in Singapore’s character education programme. These tensions arise from the simultaneous objectives of empowering citizens to handle the challenges of multicultural engagements alongside the limits placed on critical-ethical thinking when applied to analyzing politics and systemic structures of power.