www.jsser.org Journal of Social Studies Education Research Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2022:13 (2),103-124 Blind patriotism is out and constructive patriotism is in: Critical thinking is the key to global citizenship Mehmet Melik Kaya1 Abstract The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between blind patriotism, constructive patriotism, global citizenship and critical thinking in pre-service teachers. The study group includes 372 teacher candidates studying at a state university in the Central Anatolian region of Turkey. Data collection tools used in the study were the Patriotic Attitude Scale, the Universal Citizenship Scale, and the Critical Thinking Tendency Scale. The research findings suggest that there are negative relationships between constructive patriotism and blind patriotism, between blind patriotism and critical thinking, and between universal citizenship and blind patriotism. In other words, as blind patriotism scores increase, the level of universal citizenship, critical thinking and constructive patriotism decreases. The research results also reveal that there is a positive and significant relationship between constructive patriotism, critical thinking and universal citizenship. That is, as the critical thinking tendencies of pre-service teachers increase, constructive patriotism and universal citizenship scores increase. A society having critical thinking tendencies would be more democratic, and more correct decisions could be made on political, social, economic and societal issues. It therefore distances people from blind patriotism and makes it easier for them to become constructive global citizens. Keywords: Patriotism, global citizenship, critical thinking, social studies, citizenship education Introduction Although the word ‘vatan’ [homeland] is of Arabic origin, it came to the Turkish language as ‘evtan’ from Ottoman Turkish. The word ‘evtan’, on the other hand, means a place where a person is born, grows up, loves and even gives his life for (Develioğlu, 1970). The Turkish Language Institution (TDK) (2021) defines the word ‘homeland’ as ‘yurt’, that is, a piece of land on which people live and create their culture. The concept of homeland differs from the concept of country in this respect, because while country is more like a geographical term, homeland emphasizes a sense of belonging more, which spiritually puts the concept of homeland before the concept of country. This means that the concept of homeland, or ‘vatan’ in Turkish literature, is a kind of 1 Dr., Faculty in the Department of Social Studies Education, Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey kymelik@gmail.com mailto:kymelik@gmail.com Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 conservative discourse; however, it does not necessarily mean patriotism. Therefore, people mostly prefer to use the concept of homeland rather than the concept of country, due to their spirituality. That is, it is often used by people who love their country. Indeed, patriotism (vatan- severlik: homeland-loving) consists of two separate words, which in fact differ from patriotism, emphasizing one’s love for one’s country. Therefore, in this study, the concept of patriotism does not mean exactly the same as in the West. Instead, it is historically far from all political connotations, and is a concept that belongs to the people, and comes from within the people of Anatolia. The use of the concept of patriot is due to its higher level of belonging and spirituality (Beken, 2010). As Elban (2015) puts it, the concept of patriotism is one of the primary concepts that states want to teach and instill in individuals or students at an early age. States try to create a citizenship role/model with the bond of patriotism. While citizenship constitutes the knowledge and official identity dimension of this desired bond, patriotism creates the emotional and belonging dimension (Elban, 2015). Therefore, keeping together different ethnic elements living in the country with a sense of belonging, that is, patriotism rather than identity, has been one of the main goals of countries. For instance, the emergence of the US social studies course seems to create a sense of belonging to the American land and culture, that is, to educate good American citizens, rather than being an official identity. Patriotism Therefore, the concept of ‘patriotism’ may have different meanings or implications in the international literature, and the meaning attributed to this concept may not necessarily overlap; therefore, it may seem contradictory. Therefore, keeping in mind the nature of social sciences, one should leave some room for interpreting such highly-culturalized concepts as homeland, country, patriotism, love of country and so on, due to the different cultural lenses of the people. Due to numerous global events, such as migration, poverty, technological developments, non- governmental organizations, and democratization processes, the concept of patriotism has differentiated and developed, not only in Turkey, but also in all other countries. While patriotism was limited to the borders of a country in the past, it has now become a global value. Patriotism is the feeling of belonging to the piece of land on which one lives (Zamir & Horowitz, 2013). Patriotism is the natural feeling of love that people have for their homeland, as citizens of a country Kaya 105 and the common feeling of human society (Wang & Jia, 2015). Patriotism is having a deep and emotional sense of belonging to one’s nation. Patriots are people who openly express their feelings, and who do not question certain things under the influence of these feelings (Huddy & Khatip, 2010; Kilinc & Tarman, 2018). Patriotism has benefits for the well-being of the nation and its citizens, such as increasing curiosity, civic engagement, and cohesion. On the other hand, many authors have emphasized that patriotism not only has positive aspects, but also negative aspects (Bar-Tal & Staub, 1997; Johnson, 1997; Reykowski, 1997). Schatz (1994) develops the concepts of blind patriotism and constructive patriotism to explain this disagreement. Blind patriotism is the uncritical acceptance and support of government policies and practices, and the excessive segregation of people in one’s own nation and society, without morally evaluating the consequences of those policies and practices, or ignoring their impact on the well-being of people (minorities) outside the group or who are members of subgroups (Staub, 1997). On the contrary, constructive patriotism is the need to balance the integrative aspect of being human with respect for the rights and well-being of all people, consideration for the well-being of one’s own community, and a sense of commitment to one’s community (Staub, 1997). Blind patriotism is when people are insensitive or blindly attached to political events in their own country. In blind patriotism, the person does not question the actions, but defends the actions with absolute loyalty, so these people have lost the ability to criticize. On the other hand, the constructive patriots have tendencies to question and criticize political action within their country. They do not blindly defend the policies carried out, but support good work and criticize bad practices by questioning them (Kahne, Ellen, 2006). Westheimer (2006) describes patriotism in two categories as democratic and authoritarian patriotism, expressing the difference between these two patriotic ideas as indicated in the following table 1: Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Table 1 Westheimer’s patriotic attitudes Authoritarian Democratic Ideology * People who think their own country is superior to others. * They believe that absolute devotion is essential for them. * They do not see the social inequalities and deficiencies in their country. * Conformist; opposition seen as dangerous and unstable. * People who respect the opinions of any nation. * They question and criticize. * They openly express the deficiencies in the country. * They respect the opposition in the country. Slogans * Right or wrong, it’s my country. Love it or leave it. * To oppose; homeland is an element. You have the right not to remain silent. Source: (Westheimer, Joel. 2006, p. 607) Citizenship is the identity of a person attached to a sovereign state (Kaya, 2021). In this context, unlike in the international literature or in Western views, citizenship might be used interchangeably with the concept of patriotism, which here means country/homeland-loving. On the other hand, a new concept of citizenship, called global citizenship, has emerged in today’s era of globalization. This change was caused not only by economic or political factors, but also by psychological factors. In today’s world, the concept of globalization has emerged as a result of political, social, economic and technological changes. Global Citizenship With the great developments of science in the world, international communications have increased as well. The increase in communication technologies led to an opportunity to have instant conversations with people on the other side of the world by way of video conferencing. Owing to transportation technology, it has become possible to come together with people from other cultures by organizing trips to the most extreme parts of the world in a short time. In addition, rail systems have transformed cities into neighborhoods and countries into cities. The concepts of time and space between cultures may therefore seem to have disappeared and the phenomenon of globalization has emerged (Salzman, 2008). Today’s concept of global citizenship has become more visible as the world has become holistic. Burrows (2004) defines global citizenship as seeing the different cultures of the world and the differences between these cultures, examining and addressing the problems in the world in detail, Kaya 107 advancing new ideas and innovation in the world. Today, people are struggling with many problems. The leading ones include forced migration, uncontrolled population growth, lack of food, wars, terrorism, as well as others. The most effective way to combat these problems is to educate and train global citizens, who can take charge on an international scale (Andrzejewski & Alessio, 1999; Rapaport, 2020; Swarts, 2020). The most important and effective tool of this training is schools. Schools may offer a helping hand in managing and directing societies. The existence of schools is extremely important, especially in keeping up with the rapidly developing era. The argument in most studies shows that the success of educational models are systems that can read the changes in the world and respond quickly to these changes and thereby adjust the education system accordingly (Hattie, 2009). Therefore, global citizenship education that could be given through schools would be able to eliminate many problems in the world before they arise. While such rapid developments as Instagram, Twitter, YouTube and Tik Tok in technology appear to remove the concept of time and space in the world, it has also revealed changes that are a part of globalization, such as economic, political, social and cultural integration in the international arena (White, 2020). As a result of these global changes, people seem to have adopted the same lifestyles and have similar lifestyles regardless of the regions in which they live (Lim, 2008; White, 2020). Osler and Starkey (2006) defined the global citizen as follows: Global citizens are those people who can; - Look at the differences between individuals with the eyes of the world. - Think that all people have equal rights. - Act both nationally and universally. - Oppose every injustice in the world. - Take responsibility for a common future. Global citizens are people who are prone to world problems, have open connections with the planet and who adopt universal values (Leek, 2016). As a result, the global citizen is a role that we do not realize every day, but in which we affect many people on a global scale (Burman et al., 2013; Andrews & Aydın, 2020). Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Having critical thinking skills is extremely important in being a constructive patriot and a global citizen because, in order to carry these two important identities, it is necessary to have certain skills. The first one of these is critical thinking. Critical Thinking The basis of critical thinking dates back to Ancient Greece and Socrates (Ruggiero, 1988). Critical thinking has become one of the important parts of education in line with the requirements of the twenty-first Century. Critical thinking would make it easier to make the right decisions on political, social, economic and societal issues in the world (Miller, 2003). There are many definitions in the literature on critical thinking. For instance, it is expressed as the product of mental processes, such as reasoning, questioning, analysis and evaluation (Paul et al., 1997). According to Ennis (1987), critical thinking is linear thinking in which what to do and what to believe is decided. Pirozzi (2003) states that critical thinking is a careful and thoughtful way of making appropriate decisions in the face of problems and events. Judge, Jones, and McCreery (2009) define critical thinking as an inquiry and a way of using the information obtained as a result of this inquiry. Starting from all these definitions, critical thinking means questioning, reasoning, analyzing, looking at events from a different perspective, questioning what is not as it is, evaluating evidence, and making a decision after examining any behavior or discourse through all these processes. Critical thinking is an integral part of educational systems and is one of the core values that people should gain in the twenty-first century (Ajaps & Obiagu, 2020; Smith, 2020). Brookfield (1997) expresses the importance of critical thinking as revealing the difference between how things should be and how they are in the current order. Therefore, critical thinking is extremely important in terms of questioning what is happening, and then deciding. Individuals with critical thinking skills have a high rate in making the right decision (Dam & Volman, 2004). Critical thinking is an essential factor affecting being both a global and a democratic citizen (Kaya, 2021). That is, individuals with critical thinking skills respect differences, which makes it easier for them to become global citizens. It also helps them to be constructive patriots rather than blind patriots, since they question what is going on. Kaya 109 This study claims that critical thinking could lead to global citizenship or constructive patriotism. Critical thinking enables individuals to make decisions on any subject with rational thought and detailed evidence (Çelik et al., 2015). Importance of the Research Schatz, Staub, & Lavine (1999) emphasize the concepts of blind patriotism and constructive patriotism and underline the importance of these concepts. Blind patriotism may seem a dangerous point of view for certain societies because the necessity for the coexistence of different ethnic elements has emerged in today’s world. For example, this is currently a hot topic in Turkey as the discussion of immigrants and refugees gets more difficult, which brings to mind the concept of constructive patriotism. Therefore, it may only be possible through the constructive patriotism in society that these differences can coexist. Blind patriots do not criticize, do not question and are blindly attached to the actions taken. Their patriotism means ‘love it or leave it’. They see their own nation and state as superior to those of others. The high loyalty and devotion of blind patriots to their own country could be discriminatory and harmful to ethnic groups from different countries or cause them to act against human rights (Bar-Tal & Staub, 1997). This poses a huge problem for differences. Undoubtedly, this would pose a big problem for a country like Turkey that has received large-scale immigration, which includes different ethnic groups. Constructive patriots criticize, question, and support what is right and do not support what is wrong. Constructive patriots respect differences and are respectful of different ethnic groups (Kahne & Ellen, 2006). The advancement of transportation and communication opportunities in the world has added a new meaning and dimension to citizenship by increasing intercultural communication and interaction. This is what we see as global citizenship. People often come across different ethnicities, religions and cultures. These encounters sometimes cause different problems to arise and result in people not understanding each other. Therefore, it is extremely important to have critical thinking skills to address these problems. Individuals with critical thinking skills are those who question, seek the truth, and are not blindly attached to what exists. That is, individuals with critical thinking skills could easily adapt to differences. Hjerm, Sevä, and Werner (2018) claim that critical thinking skills reduce xenophobia and racist thoughts. In other words, the tendency to think critically would erode blind patriotism and be a component of constructive patriotism and, therefore, positively affect the perception of global citizenship. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 This study, firstly, aims to examine the possible relationships between blind patriotism, constructive patriotism, global citizenship and critical thinking. The second purpose of the study is to reveal the mediating role of critical thinking in the relationship between blind patriotism, constructive patriotism and global citizenship. Method The correlational research method is used in this study. The purpose of correlational studies is to understand the measurement values of two or more statistically related variables (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000). The relational survey method was seen as appropriate for the study, since the aim is to reveal the interaction between pre-service teachers’ critical thinking dispositions, global citizenship, blind patriotism and constructive patriotism in detail, without establishing a cause- effect relationship (Çepni, 2012). Data Collection and the Sample The research sample consisted of 372 pre-service teachers, including pedagogical formation students selected by random sampling, studying at a state university in the Central Anatolian region of Turkey. The research subjects were determined on a voluntary basis during the lectures of the instructor for two semesters. Before the measurement tool was distributed to the student teachers, it was declared both orally and in written form that participation in the study was voluntary. The measurement tool was administered to the research subjects during the instructor’s class. The subjects were given sufficient time to complete the instrument entirely. In addition, 5 points were added to the exam grades of the research subjects as an incentive for them to participate in the study. Initially, the participants were targeted as 400 student teachers in total. However, 28 of them were eliminated because they did not mark all the items necessary. Data Collection Tools The Patriotism Attitude Scale (PAS): This scale was developed by Schatz, Staub and Lavine (1999) and adapted into Turkish by Yazıcı and Yazıcı (2010). As a result of the explanatory factor analysis in the validity study, the factor loads ranged from .33 to .64 for blind patriotism and from .57 to .79 for constructive patriotism. In the confirmatory factor analysis, the statistical results of goodness of fit were calculated as RMSEA= .078, RMR=.080, SRMR=.071, GFI=.90, AGFI=.87, Kaya 111 and CFI=.81. The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency reliability coefficients were .76 for blind patriotism, .77 for constructive patriotism, and .75 for the entire scale. The Global Citizenship Scale (GCS): The scale was developed by Morais and Ogden (2011), and adapted to Turkish culture by Akın, Sarıçam et al. (2014). As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis, the fit index values of the 3-dimensional (global responsibility, global competence and global civic commitment) model of 30 items were found to be χ²=562.22, sd=395, RMSEA=.038, NFI= .90, CFI=.90, IFI=.91, and SRMR=.066. The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be .60, .69, and .86, respectively. The corrected item-total correlation coefficients ranged from .16 to .65. The Critical Thinking Disposition Scale (CTDS): The scale was developed by Sosu (2013) and adapted into Turkish by Akın et al. (2013). As a result of confirmatory factor analysis, the goodness of fit values of 11 items and two-dimensional (openness to criticism and reflective skepticism) scale were calculated as NFI= .92, CFI= .93, IFI= .93, RFI= .89, and SRMR= .026. There is a positive correlation of r= .29 between critical thinking dispositions and self-criticism. The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency reliability coefficients were .95 for openness to criticism, .96 for reflective skepticism, and .97 for the whole scale. Analysis Once the data collection procedure was completed, as described in detail above, the data obtained from the participants was analyzed through SPSS, statistical analysis software. A Pearson product- moment correlation analysis was used to examine the relationships between variables, and stepwise (multiple) regression analysis was used to determine the mediating role of critical thinking in the relationship between blind patriotism, constructive patriotism, and global citizenship. The significance level was taken to be p <.01. Findings In order to examine the relationship between the pre-service teachers’ Patriotism Attitude Scale’s blind patriotism and constructive patriotism score dimensions, a Pearson correlation analysis was performed, because the scale scores showed a normal distribution. The results are presented in Table 2. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Table 2 The Relationship between Blind Patriotism and Constructive Patriotism Constructive Patriotism Blind Patriotism r -0,506 p 0,000 As can be seen in Table 2, there is a statistically significant negative correlation between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism (r = -0.506; p<0.05). In summary, there is a negative relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism; that is, as blind patriotism increases, the constructive patriotism score decreases. Since the scale scores showed a normal distribution, a Pearson correlation analysis was carried out in order to examine the relationship between pre-service teachers’ Patriot Attitude Scale scores and Global Citizenship Scale scores. The results are displayed in Table 3. Table 3 The Relationship between Patriotic Attitudes and Global Citizenship Global Civic Commitment Global Competence Global Responsibility Blind Patriotism r -0,460 -0,452 -0,515 p 0,000 0,000 0,000 Constructive Patriotism r 0,464 0,511 0,483 p 0,000 0,000 0,000 Table 3 indicates that there are negative and moderately statistically significant relationships between blind patriotism and global civic participation, global competence and global responsibility (respectively r = -0,460; -0,452; -0,515; p<0,05). It has been determined that there are positive and moderately statistically significant relationships between constructive patriotism and global civic participation, global competence and global responsibility (respectively r = 0,464; 0,511; 0,483; p<0,05). In brief, there are negative relationships between blind patriotism and global citizenship behavior; that is, as blind patriotism increases, the global citizenship score decreases. There are positive relationships between constructive patriotism and global citizenship behavior, which means that, as constructive patriotism increases, global citizenship increases. Because the scale scores showed a normal distribution, a Pearson correlation analysis was performed in order to examine the relationship between the Patriotism Attitude Scale scores of Kaya 113 pre-service teachers and their Critical Thinking Disposition Scale scores. The results are shown in Table 4. Table 4 The Relationship between Patriotism Attitudes and Critical Thinking Openness to Criticism Reflective Skepticism Blind Patriotism r -0,480 -0,515 p 0,000 0,000 Constructive Patriotism r 0,611 0,604 p 0,000 0,000 As can be seen in Table 4, there are negative and moderately statistically significant relationships between blind patriotism, openness to criticism and reflective skepticism (respectively r = -0,480; -0,515; p<0,05). It has been determined that there are positive and moderately statistically significant relationships between constructive patriotism, openness to criticism and reflective skepticism (respectively r = 0,611; 0,604; p<0,05). In summary, there is negative relationship between blind patriotism and critical thinking dispositions. This means that, as critical thinking tendency decreases, blind patriotism increases. There are positive relationships between constructive patriotism and critical thinking dispositions. As critical thinking tendency increases, constructive patriotism increases. The structural equation model was used to examine the mediating effect of critical thinking disposition on the relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism. The mediating effects of openness to criticism (Model 1) and reflective skepticism (Model 2) dimensions of the Critical Thinking Disposition Scale were examined separately. The analysis results are presented in Table 5 and the examined models are shown in Figure 1. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Table 5 Examining the mediating effect of critical thinking disposition in the relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism Paths Path coefficient (Β) Std. Path coefficient (β) p No mediating variable Blind Patriotism -> Constructive Patriotism -0,51 -0,51 <0,05 Model 1 Blind Patriotism -> Openness to Criticism (Direct effect) -0,40 -0,48 <0,05 Openness to Criticism -> Constructive Patriotism (Direct effect) 0,59 0,48 <0,05 Blind Patriotism -> Constructive Patriotism (Direct effect) -0,28 -0,28 <0,05 Blind Patriotism -> Openness to Criticism -> Constructive Patriotism (Indirect effect) -0,23 -0,23 Model 2 Blind Patriotism -> Reflective Skepticism (Direct effect) -0,26 -0,52 <0,05 Reflective Skepticism -> Constructive Patriotism (Direct effect) 0,93 0,47 <0,05 Blind Patriotism -> Constructive Patriotism (Direct effect) -0,27 -0,27 <0,05 Blind Patriotism -> Reflective Skepticism -> Constructive Patriotism (Indirect effect) -0,24 -0,24 Table 5 indicates that the standardized path coefficient from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism is -0.51 when there is no mediating variable, and this effect is statistically significant (p<0.05). Model 1 shows that the path coefficient from blind patriotism to openness to criticism (β= -0.48) and path coefficient from openness to criticism to constructive patriotism (β= 0.48) are statistically significant (p<0.05). When openness to criticism is included in the model, the path coefficient from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism is -0.28, which is statistically significant (p<0.05). The indirect effect from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism through openness to criticism was -0.23. The inclusion of openness to criticism in the model reduced the strength of the path coefficient from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism, but it remains statistically significant. Therefore, openness to criticism has a partial mediating effect on the effect from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism. As can be seen in Model 2, the path coefficient from blind patriotism to reflective skepticism (β= -0.52) and from reflective skepticism to constructive patriotism (β= 0.47) are statistically significant (p<0.05). When reflective skepticism is included in the model, the path coefficient from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism is - 0.27, which is statistically significant (p<0.05). The indirect effect from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism through reflective skepticism was -0.24. The inclusion of reflective skepticism in the model reduced the strength of the path coefficient from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism, but it remains statistically significant. Therefore, reflective skepticism has a partial mediating effect on the effect from blind patriotism to constructive patriotism. Kaya 115 Consequently, critical thinking has a mediating role in the relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism. Figure 1. A model examining the mediating effect of critical thinking disposition in the relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism Discussion, Conclusion and Implications The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between blind patriotism, constructive patriotism, global citizenship and critical thinking in pre-service teachers. The research findings suggest that there are negative relationships between constructive patriotism and blind patriotism, No Mediating Variable Model 1 Model 2 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 between blind patriotism and critical thinking, and between universal citizenship and blind patriotism. In other words, as blind patriotism scores increase, the level of universal citizenship, critical thinking and constructive patriotism decreases. Similar to the findings of the current study, Sumino (2021) reveals that the citizens of countries where non-democratic and authoritarian governments are dominant have lower ties to the world and, therefore, blind citizenship scores are significantly higher. In another research study, Richey (2011) reveals that blind patriotism is more prominent in countries where civic participation is low. In the international literature, the low level of education of blind patriots, their lack of or low level of ability to question, and their close adherence to national values weaken their ties with the world. The fact that such people are more traditional and protective are seen as the biggest obstacles to them becoming world citizens. The research reveals that blind patriotism increased as the tendency to think critically decreased. For instance, Williams, Foster & Krohn (2008) found in their study that there is a negative relationship between blind patriotism and critical thinking, and a significant positive difference between constructive patriotism and critical thinking. In a study on the effect of education on blind patriotism, Sumino (2021) compares the individuals of democratic countries with the individuals of conservative countries and reveals that individuals living in democratic countries with a critical point of view differ negatively against blind patriotism. Richey (2011) states that blind citizenship is more popular in places where the power of party identity, ideology and partisanship are at the forefront, and where there is no critical point of view. The present study demonstrates that as constructive patriotism increased, global citizenship increased. In a study comparing patriotism and global citizenship, Altıkulaç (2016) reports that people who prefer global citizenship care about world citizenship and do not believe in the concept of nation. In this regard, it is thought that constructive patriots can become global citizens more easily, because constructive citizens are empathetic people and are not blindly attached to certain national values. In fact, they are people who want national values to be integrated with universal values. Ben-Porath (2007) states that it is necessary to teach patriotism in a way that expands and enriches its borders; for this, it is essential to teach more advanced perspectives and to support the urgent needs of society to come together. Hjerm, Sevä & Werner (2018) acknowledge that critical thinking skills are an important factor for the success of multicultural education studies. Multicultural personality is an important factor for global citizenship, as it is easier for an individual who grows up in a multicultural environment to interact and adapt to different cultures. Kaya 117 Akar (2017) concludes in a research study on classroom teachers that critical thinking disposition is an important predictor of multiculturalism. Similarly, Polat (2012), Toprak (2008), Anıl & Yavuz (2010), and Çoban et al. (2010) reach similar results with this finding of the present study in their studies. As a result, multiculturalism and critical thinking are crucial for the phenomenon of global citizenship. These three concepts are of great significance in complementing each other. Ercan (2015) asserts that increasing the level of democratic culture, education and welfare would result in an increase of constructive patriotism. Increasing constructive patriotism would naturally increase global citizenship. To illustrate, countries with high income and education levels (such as the USA and Canada) are countries with a multinational identity, and these are advantageous in terms of world citizenship compared to countries with lower economic welfare and education levels. Williams (2005) proclaims in a research study that critical thinking is an important predictor of global citizenship, as the use of critical thinking among the leaders of society increases and citizens will have better problem-solving skills at the social level. The research points out that as the tendency for critical thinking increases, constructive patriotism increases. In a research study on patriotism, Altıkulaç (2016) argues that the new educational approach in the world raises young people with a critical perspective, making it easier for them to become constructive world citizens. Yo, Sudibjo, & Santoso (2018) express in their research that critical thinking is an essential factor in preparation for global citizenship, and that the negative effects of globalization can only be minimized with critical thinking skills. Schatz & Staub (1997) emphasize that being blindly attached to a country’s politics and actions, and not having a critical perspective, undermines constructive citizenship. People who criticize, question and empathize are constructive patriots. Unlike blind patriots, these are individuals with critical thinking dispositions; they do not accept things as they are. While accepting the reasonable, this criticizes the unreasonable in a democratic culture. In this respect, critical thinking is of great importance for constructive patriotism. Research findings clearly support this as well. It has been revealed in the research that critical thinking has a mediating role in the relationship between blind patriotism and constructive patriotism. Börü & Yılmaz (2020) link the lowering of blind patriotism scores further to the fact that pre-service teachers have critical thinking skills. This evidently shows that critical thinking has a positive relationship with constructive patriotism and a negative relationship with blind patriotism. In this regard, it supports the results of the current research. Other studies (Elban, 2011; Şahin, 2014; Yazıcı et al., 2016) also provide the same Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 results. Yo, Sudibjo, & Santoso (2018) underline in their research that critical thinking is a prominent tool for patriotism, and that the negative aspects of patriotism could be eliminated through critical thinking. In their study, Yazıcı & Yazıcı (2009) reveal that there is a significant negative relationship between pre-service teachers’ levels of blind patriotism and constructive patriotism. They conclude that the scores of blind citizenships were higher in the research findings. Kabaklı & Çimen (2017) find in their study on university students that the blind patriotism attitudes of university students were higher than constructive patriotism attitudes. Altıkulaç (2016) concludes in a study on patriotism that the constructive patriotism attitudes of the participants were higher than the blind patriotism attitudes. Börü & Yılmaz (2020) find in their study on students of the Faculty of Education that constructive patriotism scores were high and blind patriotism scores were moderate. The reason why pre-service teachers’ blind patriotism scores were lower was related to their social justice levels, and it was determined that the reason for this was that teacher candidates with this skill could see the negative aspects of the system and object to them. Moreover, many studies in the national and international literature support the current results. Specifically, blind patriotism or the differentiation of constructive patriotism varies according to various factors, such as country of residence, education level, socio-economic status of their families, the environment they live in, democratic culture, and others, but not according to variables such as age and gender (Ercan, 2015; Sumino, 2021; Westheimer, 2009). Consequently, while a study conducted in a region of Turkey found that there was a negative significant difference between blind and constructive patriotism, the current study indicates that critical thinking could be a significant tool for patriotism. This is because, while blind patriots in general seem object to critical thinking, constructive patriots, on the contrary, support the argument that having a critical point of view would make them better citizens. The current research findings, based on the measurement of the scale results, also support this. In a country like Turkey in particular, where there is a large immigrant population, critical thinking skills may help people to grow into constructive patriots and make it easier for them to become citizens of the world. This is because Turkey has been in a difficult situation, both socially and economically, due to increasing immigration pressure in recent years. This has triggered significant anti-immigrant sentiment. Therefore, in order to prevent such problems, it has become an extremely important issue to train teachers with critical thinking dispositions. Critical thinking is a need for thinking, Kaya 119 and it is paranoia and delusion that it will raise anarchists by creating an atmosphere of chaos as claimed by certain others. By providing a democratic atmosphere through critical thinking, not only the inner peace of individuals, but also social welfare would increase. On the other hand, it would contribute positively to global citizenship awareness as well as to national citizenship. Teachers who can think critically and who are constructive patriots can play a significant role in solving immigrant problems. Westheimer (2009) argues that democratic patriotism education can only be given by teachers who adopt a constructive patriotic attitude. Therefore, more emphasis should be placed on patriotism and critical thinking education in universities and other levels of education. Considering that citizenship education especially is included in social studies, it is of great importance that such courses take place more often in the undergraduate programs of social studies teachers. The content of constructive citizenship education should be enriched in countries such as Turkey that have serious problems with immigration. With such training, it is vital to raise individuals who criticize, question, and who do not blindly obey, because only individuals who can criticize and grow up in a democratic environment can easily become world citizens. References Ajaps, S., & Obiagu, A. (2020). Increasing Civic Engagement Through Civic Education: A Critical Consciousness Theory Perspective. Journal of Culture and Values in Education. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2020.2 Akar, C. (2017). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının eleştirel düşünme eğilimlerinin çokkültürlülük değerlerini yordama düzeyi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 741-762. Altikulaç, A. (2016). Patriotism and Global Citizenship as Values: A Research on Social Studies Teacher Candidates. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(36), 26-33. Akın, A., Sarıçam, H. Akın, Ü., Yıldız, B., Demir, T., & Kaya, M. (2014, April). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Global Citizienship Scale. 3rd International Symposium on Social Studies Education, Ankara. Akin, A., Hamedoğlu, M. A., Sariçam, H., Akin, U., İlbay, A. B., Civan, S., & Demir, T. (2013, December). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Scale. Paper presented at the 2nd ICCLS 2013, December, 17-19, Ankara, Turkey. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.2020.2 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Andrzejewski, J., & Alessio, J. (1999). Education for global citizenship and social responsibility. Progressive Perspectives, 1(2), 2-17. Anıl, D. & Yavuz, G. (2010). Öğretmen adayları için çok kültürlü eğitime yönelik tutum ölçeği güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications. 1056-1062. Andrews, K., & Aydin, H. (2020). Pre-service Teachers' Perceptions of Global Citizenship Education in the Social Studies Curriculum. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 11(4), 84-113. Bar-Tal & Staub, E., Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Bar-Tal, D. ve Staub, E. (1997). Introduction: patriotism: its scope and meaning, Patriotism in The Lives of Individuals and Nations (Ed. Bar-Tal, D. ve Staub, E.), Chicago: NelsonHall Publishers, 1-19. Ben-Porath, S. (2007). Civic virtue out of necessity: Patriotism and democratic education. Theory and Research in Education, 5(1), 41-59. Börü, N., & Yılmaz, S. (2020). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin vatanseverlik tutum düzeyi. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, 7(56), 2119-2125. Brookfield, S. D. (1997). Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explor Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting. England: Open University Press. Burman, K., De Castro, E., Gonzalez, J., Morton, C., Thompson, B., Kaufman, J. and Macfadyen, L. (2013). What is Global Citizenship. Yael Harlap(Ed), Road to global citizenship, An Educator's Toolbook, Centre for Teaching and Academic Growth University of British Columbia. Burrows, D. (2004, October). World citizenship. Paper presented at the American Council on Education Regional Conference on New Directions in International Education, Beloit, Wisconsin. Beken, D. C., (2010). Türkiye’de ulus devletin inşasında üniversite mezunlarının vatanseverlik olgularına katkıları. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Muğla Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Muğla. Çelik, İ., Sarıçam, H., Sakız, H., & Ilbay, A. İ. (2015). The link between critical thinking dispositions and life satisfaction among university students: The mediating role of meaning in life. Ozean Journal of Social Science, 8(3), 121-138. Çepni, S. (2012). Araştırma ve Proje Çalışmalarına Giriş, 5. Bursa: Celepler Matbaacılık. Çoban, A. E., Karaman, N. G. ve Doğan, T. (2010). Öğretmen adaylarının kültürel farklılıklara yönelik bakış açılarının çeşitli demografik değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Dergisi, (10), 1. Kaya 121 Dam, G. T. ve Volman, M. (2004). Critical Thinking a Citizenship Competence: Teaching Strategies. Learning and Instruction, 14, 359-379. Develioğlu, F. (1970). Osmanlı-Türkçe Ansiklopedik Lügat. Ankara: Doğuş Matbaası. Elban, M. (2011). Ortaöğretim 11.Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Tarih Dersine Yönelik Tutumları ile Vatanseverlik Tutumları Arasındaki İlişkilerin İncelenmesi. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara. Elban, M. (2015). Ortaöğretim Öğrencilerinin Tarih Dersine İlişkin Tutumları: Ankara İli Kazan İlçesi Örneği. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 2(2), 103-118. Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. B. Baron & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 9–26). W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co. Ercan, R. (2015). Yetişkinlerde yurtseverlik tutumlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [an investigation into attitudes of patriotism in adults with respect to demographic variables]. Turkish Studies, 10(3), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.7827/ TurkishStudies.7976. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education (4th ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill. Hattie, J. (2009). The contributions from teaching approaches-part 1. J. Hattie.(Eds.), Visible learning: A synthesis of over, 800, 161-199. Hjerm, M., Sevä, I. J., & Werner, L. (2018). How critical thinking, multicultural education and teacher qualification affect antiimmigrant attitudes. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 27(1), 42-59. DOI:10.1080/09620214.2018.1425895. Johnson, G. R. (1997). The evolutionary roots of patriotism. In D. Bar-Tal & E. Staub (Eds.), Patriotism: In the lives of individuals and nations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Judge, B., Jones, P., & Mccreery, E. (2009). Study skills in education. London: Learning Matters. Kabaklı-Çimen, L. (2017). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Vatanseverlik Tutumları İle Benlik Kurguları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 1950-1975. Kahne, J. & Ellen, M., (2006). Is Patriotism Good For Democracy? A Study Of High School Seniors’ Patriotic Commitments. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(8), 600-607. Kaya, M. M. (2021). State, Citizens and Education in the Ottoman Empire: Civic Education Curriculum in the Early 20th Century. Research in Educational Policy and Management, 3(2), 42-72. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Kaya, M.M. (2021). The Relationships Between Global Citizenship, Multicultural Personality and Critical Thinking. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(4), 274-292. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2021.383.15 Huddy, L., & Khatib, N., (2010) “American Patriotism, National Identity, and Political Involvement”, American Journal of Political Science 51/1 (2010): 63-77. Kilinc, E. & Tarman, B. (2018). Global citizenship vs. patriotism: The correlation between pre- service teachers’ perception of patriotism and global citizenship. In A. Rapoport (Ed.), Competing Frameworks: Global and National in Citizenship Education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Lim, C. P. (2008). Global citizenship education, school curriculum and games: Learning Mathematics, English and Science as a global citizen. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1073-1093. Leek, J. (2016). Global citizenship education in school curricula. A Polish perspective. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 7(2), 51-74. Miller, A. S. (2003). The development of critical thinking in adult learners using multilogical problems and dialogical instruction. (Doctoral Dissertation), Retrieved from Walden University, Proquest database on 10 January 2022. Morais, B. D., & Ogden C. A. (2011) Initial development and validation of the Global Citizenship Scale. Journal of Studies in International Education, 15(5), 445-466. Doi:10.1177/1028315310375308. Osler, A., & Starkey, H. (2006). Education for democratic citizenship: A review of research, policy and practice 1995–2005. Research papers in education, 21(4), 433-466. Paul, R., Elder, L. ve Bartell, T. (1997). A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking. California Teacher Preparation for Instruction in Critical Thinking: Research Findings and Policy Recommendations: State of California, California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, Sacromento, C.A. Pirozzi, R. (2003). Critical reading, critical thinking. New York: Longman. Polat, S. (2012). Okul müdürlerinin çok kültürlülüğe ilişkin tutumları. Hacettepe üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 42(42), 334-343. Rapoport, A. (2020). Editorial: Technologization of Global Citizenship Education as Response to Challenges of Globalization. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 5(1), i-vii. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.ed Reykowski, J. (1997). Patriotism and the collective system of meanings In D. Bar-Tal & E. Staub (Eds.), Patriotism: In the lives of individuals and nations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.ed Kaya 123 Richey, S. (2011). Civic engagement and patriotism. Social Science Quarterly, 92(4), 1044-1056. Ruggiero, V. R. (1988). Teaching thinking across the curriculum. New York: Harper & Row Salzman, M. B. (2008). Globalization, religious fundamentalism and the need for meaning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(8) 318-327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.04.006. Schatz, R. T. (1994). On being a good American: Blind versus constructive patriotism. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Massachusetts - Amherst. Schatz, R. T., Staub, E., & Lavine, H. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment: Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20(1), 151–174. Schatz, R. T., Staub. E. (1997). Manifestations of blind and constructive patriotism. In Patriotism, ed. Daniel Bar-Tal and Erving Staub. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Smith, A. (2020). Critical Race Theory: Disruption in Teacher Education Pedagogy. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 3(1), 52-71. https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.03.01.4 Staub, E. (1997). Blind versus constructive patriotism: Moving from embeddedness in the group to critical loyalty and action. In D. Bar-Tal & E. Staub (Eds.), Patriotism: In the lives of individuals and nations. Chicago: Nelson Hall. Sosu, E. M. (2013). The development and psychometric validation of a Critical Thinking Disposition Scale. Thinking skills and creativity, 9(7) 107-119. Sumino, T. (2021). My Country, Right or Wrong: Education, Accumulated Democratic Experience, and Political Socialization of Blind Patriotism. Political Psychology. 42(6) 923-940. Swarts, G. (2020). Re/coding Global Citizenship: How Information and Communication Technologies have Altered Humanity… and Created New Questions for Global Citizenship Education. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 5(1), 70-85. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.4 Şahin, Ç. P. (2014). Polis Okulu Öğrencilerinin Adil Dünya İnancı, Otoriterlik, Sistemi Meşrulaştırma, Vatanseverlik ve İnsan Hakları Tutumlarının İncelenmesi, (Unpblished masters thesis), Ege Ünüversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir. Toprak, G. (2008). Öğretmenlerin çokkültürlü tutum ölçeğinin güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması (Unpblished masters thesis). Gazi Osman Paşa Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Tokat. UNESCO (2014). Global citizenship education: Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century. Paris, UNESCO. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.04.006 https://doi.org/10.46303/jcve.03.01.4 https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.4 Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2022: 13 (2), 103-124 Wang, J., & Jia, S. (2015). The contemporary value of patriotism. Advances in Applied Sociology, 5(6)161-166. Weisband, E., & Thomas, C. I. P. (2015). Political culture and the making of modern nation-states. London and NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Westheimer, J. (2006). Politics and patriotism in education. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(8), 608-620. Westheimer, J. (2009). Should social studies be patriotic?, Social Education, 73(7), 316-320. White, C. (2020). Wielding Social Media in the Cyber-Arena: Globalism, Nationalism, and Civic Education. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 5(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.1 Williams, R. L. (2005). Targeting critical thinking within teacher education: The potential impact on society. The Teacher Educator, 40(3), 163-187. Williams, R. L., Foster, L. N., & Krohn, K. R. (2008). Relationship of patriotism measures to critical thinking and emphasis on civil liberties versus national security. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 8(1), 139-156. Yazıcı, F, Pamuk, A ve Yıldırım, T. (2016). Tarih Öğretmen Adaylarının Çokkültürlülük ve Yurtseverlik Tutumları Arasındaki İlişki. Turkish Studies International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 11(9 Spring): 947–64. Yazıcı, S., & Yazıcı, F. (2010). Yurtseverlik Tutum Ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 901-918. Yo, R., Sudibjo, N., & Santoso, A. (2018). Fostering students’ character of patriotism and critical thinking skills. In Character Education for 21st Century Global Citizens (pp. 499-509). Routledge. Zamir, S. & Horowitz, T. (2013). The manifestation of the value of patriotism among Israeli trainee teachers - natives and immigrants: How will they educate their pupils in the light of this value?. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, Journal For Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(4), 202-223. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.01.1