In their book, Social Studies and the World, Merry M. Merryfield and Angene Wilson offer a strong rationale and a variety of objectives for teaching global perspectives in world history. Their rationale is multi-faceted and is largely predicated on the importance of understanding an increasingly integrated and connected world in the 21st Century. Global education is multi-disciplinary and focuses on the past, present and future. According to authors, the aims of a global education is to prepare students to participate in human affairs, both local and global. To do this, teachers should seek to teach students to appreciate the similarities and difference of both diverse cultures and perspectives, understand world systems, examine global issues and actors worldwide, and also examine international power structures. Teaching world history also prepares student to participate in cross-cultural interactions and aims to reduce prejudice. Like all social studies education, the study of world history should incorporate changing technology in to the classroom and give opportunities to students to develop their research and thinking skills. The most significant objective for teaching global education is creating cross-cultural awareness and respect for multiple perspectives. I believe that these objectives are unique to teaching globally.
While the authors' rationales supporting global education seem logical and positively aimed at encouraging student to contribute to the world in a positive way, teaching global perspectives has also been criticized. While Merryfield and Wilson identify and counter many criticisms of global education, it is important to be aware that some topics are controversial and local community issues should be considered when choosing course topics. One response to the criticism of global education that I disagree with is the concession that because global education focuses less on Western civilization and places the U.S. within world history, it “de-exceptionalizies American history” (21). In many ways global education can help student appreciate the U.S. to a greater extent as students come to understand the value of living in country that offers many educational opportunities, political stability, and security.
Merryfield and Wilson frequently use the term “world-mindedness" to describe their overall teaching philosophy. They recommend that student should develop an awareness and ability to participate in cross-cultural interactions. It seems the skill set that accompanies worldmindedness, according to Merryfield and Wilson, can only be learned through engaging in cross-cultural interactions. Having spent two years abroad, the teaching philosophy really speaks to me. I believe it is essential when teaching global education to seize opportunities to gain exposure to different cultures, even within the United States. These experiences are invaluable in teaching how diverse cultures affect people actions, and international relations. Exposure to another culture fosters an appreciation and eventually an ability to approach situations from various cultural perspectives.
I feel that the only negative aspect of the teaching philosophy of worldmindedness is that it is exclusive in requiring teachers have had cross-cultural experiences and can apply what they have learned from these experiences in the classroom. While I believe the meaningful experiences with other cultures certain help teaching of global education, I don't think they are absolutely essential. I often discuss my own experiences living in Thailand and Brazil when I am teaching. I know drawing on these experiences helps me be a more effective teacher, but I do not think these experiences should necessarily be a requirement for social studies teachers. Teachers who are interested and open to cross-cultural experience can certainly teach effectively as well and also work towards gaining cross-cultural experiences for themselves and their students when they design their curriculum.
Overall Merryfield and Wilson's book has made me conclude that world history is best taught from a thematic approach. This allows student to understand the importance of historical events and developments over time and relate what they have learned to the present. Possible units of study for a world history class would include the study of economic systems, political power and institutions, technology, the environment, and cultural units on social organization and religion. In each of these categories it is essential for students to understand how systems changed and global connections were made throughout history.
I believe teaching social studies should focus on many levels of student identity and teaching from a global perspective allows for this. Students develop as individuals, community members, American citizens and most importantly citizens of the world. The activities Merryfield and Wilson describe to help students identify how their own perspectives and experiences shape their worldview would be quite helpful but could also incorporate reflection on how American culture and institutions shape an individual’s worldview. I understand one goal of global education is to appreciate how culture influences individuals, however sometimes it easier to identify cultural influences when considering a larger group.
No comments:
Post a Comment