Title


7 

Global Education in the United States: A Retrospective, 1976-2000 
 

Thomas A. Kessinger 
Xavier University 

 
"The flattening of the world…has presented us with new 
opportunities, new challenges, new partners but also, alas, 
new dangers, particularly as Americans…It is imperative that 
we be the best global citizens we can be…" (p. 468). 

Thomas L. Friedman (2005) 
 

Introduction 
 The subject of "global education" has ebbed and 
flowed in the United States over the past thirty years even 
though the movement's roots date back to the 1960s. This 
manuscript offers a look at various notions and definitions of 
global education, then identifies advocates for global 
education, and—in the process—reviews the literature of the 
movement from 1976-2000.  
 According to Kniep (1985a), increased interest in 
global education first began in the United States in the 1960s. 
Popular thinkers as well as scholarly writers raised the issue 
of globalization. Events such as the consideration of North 
American free trade caused people to consider the 
international environment. Fuller (1970) used the metaphor 
"spaceship Earth" to convey a vision of the planet and its 
inhabitants as a closed system requiring all working together 
for survival and maintenance. Earlier McLuhan (1964) 
detailed how the media have transformed the world into a 
"global village." Reischauer (1974) and others told of the 
world in the process of becoming a single great mass of 
humanity—"a global community" (p. 3). Technology and 
progress were encouraged and desired until Carson (1962) 
wrote her best seller detailing the negative effects of 
pesticides. Ehrlich (1968) talked extensively about 
unmanageable world population growth. Toffler (1970) 
recounted the unsettling way that change occurs before its 
impact can be absorbed. So, as writers penned their warnings 
and as world events occurred and changed public awareness 
and opinion, global education began to take form. As a result, 
some states and professional organizations developed 
position statements on global education. 
 

Definitions of Global Education 
 In the literature there are many definitions of global 
or international education. In fact the Encyclopedia of 
Educational Research (1982) indicated global and 
international education are often interchanged and (either 
one) is "the purposeful movement of ideas and scholars 
across cultural and geographic boundaries…" (p. 946). There 
is not a precise and meaningful definition of global education 
for every situation. Goodlad (1979) wrote there are no 
"readily available, comprehensive, self-contained definitions, 
descriptions, and analyses of what global education is" (p. 3). 
According to Smith (1994) in his "brief history" of the field: 
 

During the past four decades global and international 
studies education moved from the periphery into the 

mainstream of American elementary and secondary 
education. Hundreds of global and international studies 
projects launched teacher education programs and 
published thousands of articles, books and 
supplemental materials….Rationales, frameworks, and 
lists of goals and objectives abound which take on the 
task of defining what is meant by global education. 
(p.16) 

 
The literature includes the following terms related to global 
education: global awareness, international awareness, 
worldly-minded, global perspective, global understanding, 
global knowledge, international education, global or world 
studies, and cross-cultural studies. Earlier, Lamy (1983) 
reported that: 
 

Global or international education has been defined, in 
general terms, as all education which has anything to 
do with the interactions between sovereign states or 
non-state actors (e.g., transnational enterprises, 
international organizations) with international 
concerns. A more specific definition is dependent 
upon the goals, priorities, values, and purposes of the 
defining party. (p. 10) 
 

In spite of the variety of definitions, however, the key term is 
global education. 
 One can approach a working definition of global 
education for use here in this paper by looking across some 
other offerings. The Michigan Department of Education 
(1978), an early pioneer and major proponent of global 
education, focused on two aspects of the subject and defined 
global education as: 
 

…the lifelong growth in understanding through study 
and participation, of the world community and the 
interdependency of its people and systems—social, 
cultural, racial, economic, linguistic, technological, 
and ecological. Global education requires an 
understanding of the values and the priorities of the 
many cultures of the world as well as the acquisition 
of basic concepts and principles related to the world 
community. Global education leads to implementation 
and application of the global perspective in striving 
for just and peaceful solutions to world problems. (p. 
3) 

  
 In this definition global perspective and global 
understanding or knowledge are stressed. Other writers 
emphasized the same components of global education. The 
following paragraphs will highlight "global perspective," the 
first of two major parts of global education. 
 



8 

Global Perspective 
 The literature includes a number of studies in which 
the global perspectives of educators have been examined (for 
example, Findlay, 1988; Kolo, 1993; Meeks, 1992; O'Malley, 
1983; Richards, 1979; Stamp, 1994; Wieber, 1982). 
 O'Malley's work (1983) emphasized educators' 
(specifically administrators') global perspectives in focusing 
on a related term, "worldmindedness." She defined this "as a 
value orientation toward the human race rather than 
knowledge or interest in international relations" (p. 2). She 
summarized who the world-minded person is by writing 
 

I submit the following: This person has become or is 
becoming an integrated individual, skilled in the art of 
human relations and conscious of the wide variety of 
behaviors in the world, rooted in family, country and 
culture but, at the same time, able to identify with 
people of other countries and cultures. Informed about 
the contemporary world scene, the world-minded 
individual is concerned about improving the conditions 
of the human family. Buttressed by a positive faith or 
philosophy of life whose basic tenets can be seen in a 
universal sense, the world-minded person believes that 
global cooperation and education are desirable as well 
as possible and wants to promote them. (pp. 23-24) 

 
Later, Meeks (1992) in his Texas study attempted to show 
the relationship between educators' global perspectives and 
their willingness to adopt components of global education. 
He concluded that these educators "see the value of including 
elements of global education into the curriculum to meet the 
demands of a changing world" (p. 63). Furthermore, he found 
global perspective is "an attitude which educators possess in 
varying degrees" (p. 63). Finally, he offered a list of 
suggestions to enhance educators' global perspectives. 
 A.H. Wilson (1994) stated: "Teaching toward a 
global future, then…requires teachers who will teach toward 
openmindedness. To do that, teachers require…perceptual 
understanding…(p. 54). Other researchers, Bruce, Podemski, 
and Anderson (1991) have recommended including a "global 
perspective" or perceptual understanding in teacher education 
programs. However, they noted the possible confusion of 
global perspective, global education and international 
education. "Teacher educators may be unaware of what 
global education means and how it differs from similar 
educational topics, such as international education. 
Moreover, definitions of the terms international education 
and global education overlap" (p. 22). Indeed Kobus (1983) 
acknowledged some confusion over the three terms, 
international, global education, and global perspective, which 
were being employed interchangeably. She, as referenced by 
Meeks (1992), identified some discrepancies in the meanings 
of the terms: 
 

This choice of designation is a significant one because 
it is the point of divergence in defining the field and 
therefore in planning curriculum, programs and teacher 
inservice training. Both international and global 
education imply a specifically delineated structured 

discipline typically assigned to social studies. 
International education is based on the study of various 
geographical and cultural areas of the world; global 
education incorporates this content but views world 
areas as parts of larger, interacting, interdependent 
systems expressed and studied through global issues. A 
global perspectives approach, on the other hand, is 
based not on implementing new courses or extensively 
redesigning curricular content, but on the infusion and 
integration into the curriculum at all levels of an 
awareness of emerging global concepts such as those 
of change, conflict, communication, and 
interdependency. Furthermore, global perspective 
implies dealing with affective content and stresses 
student acquisition of competencies which incorporate 
essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes. (pp.10-11) 
 

 According to Tucker and Cistone (1991), a global 
perspective transcends courses on world geography and 
world history; "it requires a holistic approach that gives 
students an understanding of themselves and their 
relationship to the world community" (p. 3). 
 As noted by Merryfield (1991) in a status report 
involving American teachers, the National Council for the 
Social Studies in 1982 called for global perspectives in all 
social studies education, defining "global perspectives as 
developing the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to live 
effectively in a world possessing limited natural resources 
and characterized by ethnic diversity, cultural pluralism, and 
increasing interdependence" (p. 11). 
 Indeed promoting a "global perspective" is a key 
goal of global education according to numerous researchers 
(Alladin, 1989; L.F. Anderson, 1992; Case, 1993; Iglitzin, 
1984; Kniep, 1985b; K.A. Tye, 1990). Hanvey (1976, 
reprinted 1979) authored the classic work to date: An 
Attainable Global Perspective. In it he offered the landmark 
five dimensions of the global perspective paradigm: 
 

1. Perspective consciousness—the "recognition or 
awareness on the part of the individual that he or 
she has a view of the world that is not universally 
shared…and that others have views of the world 
that are profoundly different from one's own" (p. 
4). 

2. "State of the Planet"—the "awareness of 
prevailing world conditions and developments, 
including emergent conditions and trends, e.g., 
population growth, migrations, economic 
conditions, resources and physical environment, 
political developments, science and technology, 
etc." (p. 6). 

3. Cross-cultural—the "awareness of the diversity of 
ideas and practices to be found in human 
societies around the world, of how such ideas 
and practices compare, and including some 
limited recognition of how the ideas and ways of 
one's own society might be viewed from other 
vantage points" (p. 8). 



9 

4. Knowledge of global dynamics—"some modest 
comprehension of key traits and mechanisms of 
the world system, with emphasis on theories and 
concepts that may increase intelligent 
consciousness of global change" (p. 13). 

5. Awareness of human choices—"some awareness 
of the problems of choice confronting 
individuals, nations, and the human species as 
consciousness and knowledge of how the global 
system expands" (p. 22). 

 
 Significantly, and certainly with a large measure of 
humility, Hanvey described his account as: "a beginning 
effort to define some elements of what we call a global 
perspective—to flesh out some of the things that we need to 
know and understand if we are to cope with the challenges of 
an increasingly interdependent world" (p. 1). 
 
 Case (1993) assumed Hanvey's model and identified 
the perceptual aspect that "describes an orientation or 
outlook…global perspective refers to the capacity to see the 
'whole picture' whether focusing on a local or an international 
matter" (p. 318). Furthermore, according to Case (1993), the 
perceptual serves as the basis of the observation that global 
education is a way of looking at the world. 
 Earlier Tye (1990) in his introduction to the 
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development's 
Global Education: From Thought to Action, said global 
education "involves perspective taking—seeing things 
through the eyes and minds of others—and it means the 
realization that while individuals and groups may view life 
differently, they also have common needs and wants" (p. 5). 
 

Integration of Understanding with Global Education 
 Although "perspective" is a major dimension of 
global education and one which has filled the literature, 
another aspect is understanding or substantive knowledge. In 
a statement issued by the Michigan Department of Education 
in 1978, both perspective and understanding of knowledge 
were included. 
 Hanvey (1979) offered a definition that includes 
both perspective and knowledge. This statement has had a 
significant influence on the field of global education. In it he 
stated: 
 

Education for a global perspective is that learning 
which enhances the individual's ability to understand 
his or her condition in the community and the world 
and improves the ability to make effective judgments 
[author's italics]. It includes the study of nations, 
cultures, and civilizations, including our own 
pluralistic society and the societies of other peoples, 
with a focus on understanding how these are all 
interconnected and how they change, and on the 
individual's responsibility in this process. It provides 
the individual with a realistic perspective on world 
issues, problems and prospects, and an awareness of 
the relationships between an individual's enlightened 

self-interest and the concerns of people elsewhere in 
the world. (p. i) 

 
A decade later, Tye (1990) said global education 
also "involves learning about  

those problems and issues that cut across national 
boundaries, and about the interconnectedness of systems—
ecological, cultural, economic, political, and technological" 
(p. 5). Wilson (1994) and Case (1991) indicated global 
education can be divided into four sub-areas, two of which 
are perceptual [or global perspective] and substantive 
knowledge. Wilson (1994) noted that "a knowledge base is 
critical for teachers, beginning with what is going on wherein 
the world, the locations of places on a world map and a 
familiarity with current events" (p. 54). 
 Kniep's (1986) account of global education 
primarily reflected the substantive dimension as well, 
although he referenced the perceptual dimension at several 
points. For example, he mentioned that global education will 
change students' perspectives on their own worldview and 
contribute to a sense of interconnectedness (pp. 438-439). 
However, the title of his article revealed his major point of 
emphasis: "Defining a Global Education by Its Content." He 
identified four elements that serve as the core of global 
education: Human values, global system, global issues and 
problems, and global history. 
 Likewise Wieber (1982) emphasized the knowledge 
component as he assessed the global knowledge of sixty-two 
teachers in a study of an American-sponsored overseas 
school. He identified a group of thirteen global issues 
(energy, food, health, population, race and ethnicity, arts and 
culture, distribution of natural characteristics, international 
monetary and trade arrangements, human rights, wards and 
armaments, environment, relations among states, religious 
issues), defined each one, and surveyed the teachers 
regarding what they knew about each issue. 

Tye and Tye (1992) offered another and current 
definition of global education which closely resembles earlier 
attempts. In fact, the first part of the definition is the same as 
what was included in Tye's (1990) work; namely: it "involves 
learning about those problems and issues that cut across 
national boundaries, and about the interconnectedness of 
systems—ecological, cultural, economic, political, 
technological" (p. 5). Indeed the knowledge component of 
global education is equally important to the perceptual or 
perspective component reviewed earlier from the literature. 

 
Rationale for Global Education 

 The field of global education is popular in the 
literature; and, global knowledge is an important dimension 
of global education. Researchers have advanced reasons why 
global education is timely and why it should be taught at all 
levels in schools in the United States. 
 C.M Anderson (1979) submitted that global 
education was important for the following reasons: 
 

1. The U.S. is rapidly being drawn into a complex 
global society with an even greater 
interdependence among nations and peoples. 



10 

2. There is an urgent need to educate citizens in this 
country to global understandings [knowledge] and 
responsibilities. 

3. There is little or no evidence to indicate that 
Americans are becoming more internationally 
minded. Indeed many observers seem to think that 
Americans are becoming more provincial. 

4. The schools are the most logical place to begin 
preparing Americans to function successfully as 
citizens of a country that must provide world 
leadership. 

5. The educational enterprise, from the U.S. Office of 
Education [now the Department of Education] to 
state departments of education, to the colleges and 
universities, to secondary and elementary schools, 
to preschools are, with few notable exceptions, 
almost totally provincial in outlook and programs. 

6. There is a need for a dramatic shift in emphasis, so 
that students at all levels and in all disciplines will 
have an opportunity to develop the understandings 
[knowledge] and skills required to be literate in a 
global society. (p. 111) 

 
The President's Commission on Foreign Language and 
International Studies (1979) stated: "International content 
should be a part of the teaching of all subjects, and within the 
capabilities of all teachers. This requires priority in both 
curriculum development and the professional development of 
teachers" (pp. 2-3). 
 Since Anderson and others' pleas, some educational 
entities have attempted to promote global education at 
various levels at selected institutions. 
 L.F. Anderson (1990) also went beyond a definition 
in his research. He set forth a rationale that includes a three-
fold argument in support of global education: 
 

(1) in the past two decades three basic historical 
changes in the social structure of the world have 
converged;  

(2) because of this conjuncture of historical trends, 
American society became more globalized in the 
1970s and 1980s and will likely become even 
more so in the 1990s and beyond; and, 

(3) education mirrors society in the sense that social 
change generates educational change. (p. 14) 

 
In other words, Anderson emphasized that global 
interdependence is rapidly increasing, American society 
(especially the economy and culture) is more globalized, and 
education must change and become more globalized. To not 
make education more global would be "intellectually stupid 
and socially irresponsible because we would be putting at 
risk the children we love, the students we teach, and the 
nation we cherish" (p. 33). In his discussion, he noted the 
global interdependence in economics: 

The world's once largely separated local, national and 
regional economies have been progressively 
incorporated into a single global economy….A rapidly 
growing portion of humankind has become dependent 

as both workers and consumers on these world 
markets….International organizations have developed 
that make and shape trade, monetary, and credit policy 
at the global level, for example, the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade [GATT], the 
International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. (p. 
15) 

 
The world's nations are growing increasingly interdependent 
as evidenced by theEuropean Community, the North 
American Free Trade Agreements, and Organization of 
Petroleum Exporting Countries. For the United States, 
according to Reich (1992), "the global economy is tightly 
linking our citizens to the citizens of other nations—linkages 
as strong as, if not stronger than, the economic connections 
binding us to one another within our borders" (p. 320). 
 Global education, according to Osunde (1984), 
emphasized the idea of "global society and the 
interdependence of nations and peoples" (p. 149). Indeed the 
present generation lives in a world society marked by a 
plethora of interdependent activities. Consequently, the 
reality is the United States is becoming more globalized, and 
the world is becoming more interconnected and 
interdependent.  
 

Global Education in the United States 
 The United States has no real choice in deciding 
whether or not to globalize education. As C.C. Anderson 
(1982) stated, "The only real issues are how, and with what 
degree of quality, and how rapidly will American education 
become more globalized" (p. 161). 
 Today more and more colleges seem to be 
demanding or encouraging that students opt for global 
education-related courses in the undergraduate programs. 
According to Pickert (1992), 

colleges and universities in the U.S. are incorporating 
their goals for international education into campus-
wide strategic plans and enriching academic 
disciplines with a comparative and international view. 
Institutions are revising curricula to alert all students to 
the languages and cultures of other countries, while 
creating faculty development opportunities that stress 
an international outlook. (p. 61) 
 

 According to Swift (1980), global education is a 
natural, holistic, interdisciplinary way or relating the 
knowledge, skills, attitudes, and experiences young people 
will need to live in tomorrow's global community. Global 
education aims to increase student awareness of cultural, 
political, and economic interdependence in the world of the 
past, present, and the future. Gilliom (1981) maintained that 
global education must be designed to cultivate a worldview 
and to develop knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to live 
effectively in a culturally diverse world characterized by 
increasing economic and social interdependency. 
 Moreover, students need to learn that there is more 
to the United States than being a part of a family, state, and 
nation. Since nations are functioning much more 
interdependently today than ever before—as exemplified by 



11 

the Iraqi Freedom Coalition Force, the G-7 or 8 group of 
nations, the European Community, GATT, the expansion of 
NATO—it is time students learn about these group as fellow 
participants in shaping a larger human culture. Turner (1974) 
accurately foresaw this phenomenon in an earlier work. 
Students should be given the opportunity to explore the realm 
of other ideals and values by being exposed to various 
thought patters and philosophies (C.C. Anderson, 1982). 
Global education should be given an important place in 
colleges and universities, particularly teachers' colleges and 
schools of education. Since much of educational policy has 
been based on public expectations, the public—through state 
legislatures and other law-or policy-making bodies—should 
expect the colleges and universities to teach global concepts 
to students; and these same legislative bodies should require 
a more global citizen as a result of public schooling 
experiences. According to L.F. Anderson (1992), as the 
world becomes more interconnected and as society in the 
United States becomes more deeply integrated into the world 
system, pressure will be brought to bear on education in the 
U.S. to globalize its curriculum. The President's Commission 
on Foreign Language and International Studies (1979) had 
recommended that if America's children are to function 
successfully as adults in the twenty-first century, they must 
grow up "with more knowledge about our interdependent 
world, keener awareness of other peoples, and greater 
sensitivity to those people's attitudes and customs" (p. 48). 
Private Initiatives Promoting Global Education 
 There is a need for global education as evidenced in 
the literature as well as from contributions offered by two 
private groups, the National Council for the Social Studies 
and The American Forum for Global Education. Both groups 
put forth major efforts to help educators and policymakers 
determine what should be in a viable global education 
program. 
 The National Council for the Social Studies (1994) 
prepared a major source document, Curriculum Standards for 
Social Studies, that impacts the aims and purposes of social 
studies and global education programs.  These standards 
define what students should learn in social studies programs 
in grades K-12.  The standards are noted in the following ten 
general strands or themes (see p. 15):   
 
 I Culture 
 II Time, Continuity, and Change 
 III People, Places, and Environment 
 IV Individual Development and Identity 
 V Individuals, Groups, and Institutions 
 VI Power, Authority, and Governance 
 VII Production, Distribution, and Consumption 

 VIII  Science, Technology, and Society 
 IX Global Connections 
 X Civic Ideals and Practices  

 
Indeed some of these strands relate directly (for example, 
“global connections”) and others indirectly to global 
education.  “Global connections” are defined below. 
 

The realities of global interdependence require 
understanding the increasingly important and diverse 
global connections among world societies and the 
frequent tension between national interests and global 
priorities.  Students will need to able to address such 
international issues as health care, the environment, 
human rights, economic competition and 
interdependence, age-old ethnic enmities, and political 
and military alliances. (p.xii) 

 
All ten strands are interrelated, and they draw from 

all the social science disciplines and other related fields of 
scholarly study. In other words, "global connections" is 
related to: culture; time, continuity, and change; power, 
authority, and governance; production, distribution, and 
consumption; and, civic ideals and practices. To fully 
understand one strand, one has to understand the other related 
strands. 

The other major contributor to setting standards was 
The American Forum for  
Global Education whose authors, Collins, Czarra, and Smith 
(1996), presented Guidelines for Global and International 
Studies Education.  This document was intended for a 
national audience who—even though academic standards for 
global and international studies had previously been 
identified and noted in some disciplines [social studies]—still 
did not know “which global issues should be included or 
what U.S. students should be expected to know and 
understand about the world” (p. 1). 
 Furthermore, these authors were concerned with 
other key issues: 
 

What skills and attitudes will our students need to 
confront future problems, which most assuredly will be 
global in scope? How are global and international 
dimensions of learning being addressed by the new 
[discipline-based] academic standards? What do 
scholars from the international relations disciplines and 
experienced practitioners of global education believe 
students should know, and how can these insights best 
be incorporated into existing standards? What global 
and international education guidelines are appropriate 
for pre-collegiate education? How will schools 
implement these guidelines when confronted with so 
many other problems? What should students know 
about the United States and its connections to the 
world? (pp.1-6) 
 

Conclusion 
Today, as evidenced in the literature, it is generally 

agreed that global education is relevant and necessary. Recall 
Boyer (1983) said: 

 
If education cannot help students see beyond 

themselves and better understand the interdependent 
nature of our world, each new generation will remain 
ignorant and its capacity to live comfortably and 
responsibly will be dangerously diminished. (p. 4)   

 



12 

References 
Alkin, M.C. (Ed.). (1992). Teacher education. In 

Encyclopedia of Educational Research, vol. 4. New 
York: Macmillan. 

Alladin, I. (1989). Teaching for global awareness. Alberta 
Teachers' Association Magazine, 69, 6-11. 

Anderson, C.C. (1982). Global education in the classroom. 
Theory into Practice, 21(3), 168-176. 

Anderson, C.M. (1979). Will schools educate for global 
understanding and responsibility? Phi Delta Kappan, 
61(2), 110-111. 

Anderson, L.F. (1990). A rationale for global education. In 
K.A. Tye (Ed.), Global education: From thought to 
action (pp.13-34). Alexandria, VA: Association for 
Supervision and Curriculum Development. 

Anderson, L.F. (1992). In B.B. Tye & K.A. Tye (Eds.), 
Global education: A study of school change (pp. xv-
xxi). Albany, NY: SUNY Press. 

Boyer, E.L. (1983). High school: A report on secondary 
education in America. New York: Harper & Row. 

Bruce, G.M., Podemski, R.S., & Anderson, C.M. (1991, 
January-February). Developing a global perspective: 
Strategies for teacher education programs. Journal of 
Teacher Education, 42(1), 21-27. 

Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin 
Company. 

Case, R. (1991). Key elements of a global perspective. 
Occcasional paper. Vancouver:  University of British 
Columbia Centre for the Study of Curriculum and 
Instruction. 

Case, R. (1993). Key elements of a global perspective. Social 
Education, 57, 318-325. 

Collins, T., Czarra, C., & Smith, A. (1996). Guidelines for 
global and international studies education. New York: 
The American Forum for Global Education. 

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: 
Macmillan. 

Ehrlich, P.R. (1968). The population bomb. New York: 
Ballantine. 

Findlay, H.E. (1988). Global attitudes held by Auburn 
University senior students (Doctoral dissertation, 
Auburn University, 1988). Dissertation Abstracts 
International, 50, A1582. 

Friedman, T.L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the 
twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and 
Giroux. 

Fuller, R.B. (1970). Operating manual for spaceship Earth. 
New York: Pocket Books. 

Gilliom, M.E. (1981, Summer). Global education and the 
social studies. Theory into Practice, 20(3), 169-173. 

Goodlad, J.I. (1979). Schooling for a global age. New York: 
McGraw-Hill. 

Hanvey, R. (1979). An attainable global perspective. New 
York: Global Perspectives in Education, Inc. [now The 
American Forum for Global Education]. 

Iglitzin, L.B. (1984). Orwell's 1984 in 1984: Challenges to 
global education. The social studies, 75, 53-55. 

Kniep, W. (1985a). A critical review of the short history of 
global education: Preparing for new opportunities. 
New York: Global Perspectives in Education. 

Kniep, W. (1985b). Global education in the eighties. 
Curriculum Review, 25(2), 16-18.  

Kniep, W. (1986). Defining a global education by its content. 
Social Education, 50, 437-446. 

Kobus, D.K. (1983). The developing field of global 
education: A review of the literature. Educational 
Research Quarterly, 8(1), 21-28. 

Kolo, D.O. (1993). A description of the level of global 
understanding of students in the undergraduate 
elementary teacher education programs and faculty 
members perceptions of global education goals at four 
universities in South Carolina (Doctoral dissertation, 
University of South Carolina, 1993). Dissertation 
Abstracts International, 54, A2493. 

Lamy, S.L. (1983). Defining global education. Educational 
Research Quarterly, 8(1), 9-22. 

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions 
of man. New York: McGraw-Hill. 

Meeks, G.B. (1992). The relationship between educators' 
global perspective and their receptivity to the inclusion 
of elements of global education in the curriculum 
(Doctoral dissertation, University of North Texas, 
1992). Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 
A2667. 

Merryfield, M.M. (1991). Preparing American secondary 
social studies teachers to teach with a global 
perspective: A status report. Journal of Teacher 
Education, 42, 11-20. 

Michigan Department of Education. (1978). Global 
education. Lansing, MI: Author. 

Mitzel, H.E. (Ed.). (1982). Global education. Encyclopedia of 
Educational Research (5th ed., Vol. 2). New York: The 
Free Press. 

National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations 
of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social 
Studies [NCSS Bulletin 89]. Washington, DC:  Author. 

O'Malley, E.M. (1983). Global awareness of administrators in 
higher education in the state of Oregon (Doctoral 
dissertation, Portland State University, 1983). 
Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, A2315. 

Osunde, E. (1984). Global perspective in the social studies 
curricula of African public schools. The Social Studies, 
75, 149-152. 

Pickert, S.M. (1992). Preparing for a global community: 
Achieving an international perspective in higher 
education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 
2. Washington, DC: The George Washington 
University. 

President's Commission on Foreign Language and 
International Studies. (1979). Background papers and 
studies/Strength through wisdom. Washington, DC: 
U.S. GPO. 

Reich, R.B. (1992). The work of nations. New York: Vintage 
Books. 

 



13 

Reischauer, E.O. (1974). Toward the 21st century: Education 
for a changing world. New York: Vantage Books. 

Richards, C.P. (1979). The degree of worldmindedness 
exhibited in schools with varying emphasis on global 
education (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State 
University, 1979). Dissertation Abstracts 
International, 40, A4877. 

Smith, A. (1994). A brief history of pre-collegiate global and 
international studies education. In J. Fonte & A. 
Ryerson (Eds.), Education for America's role in world 
affairs (pp.1-21). Lanham, MD: University Press of 
America. 

Stamp, K.L. (1994). Global education attitudes and practices 
in Iowa's high schools (Doctoral dissertation, 
University of Northern Iowa, 1994). Dissertation 
Abstracts International, 55, A3059. 

Swift, J. (1980, December). Global education: What's in it for 
you? English Journal, 69(9), 46-50.  

Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. New York: Random House. 
Tucker, J. & Cistone, P.J. (1991). Global perspectives for 

teachers: An urgent priority. Journal of Teacher 
Education, 42(1), 3-10. 

Turner, P.R. (1974). Why Johnny doesn't want to learn a 
foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 58, 191-
196. 

Tye, K.A. (1990). Introduction: The world at a crossroads. In 
K.A. Tye (Ed.), Global education: From thought to 
action (pp. 1-9). Alexandria, VA: Association for 
Supervision and Curriculum Development. 

Tye, B., & Tye, K. (1992). Global education: A study of 
school change. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. 

Wieber, D. L. (1982). As assessment of global knowledge of 
k-12 teachers in an American-sponsored overseas 
school. (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State 
University, 1982).  Dissertation Abstracts 
International, 43, A3806. 

Wilson, A. H.  (1994). Teaching toward a global future and 
the future of global teaching. In M. R. Nelson (Ed.), 
The future of the social studies.  Boulder, CO: Social 
Science Education Consortium.