Special issue: Reimagining teacher education for the future – global perspectives at the intersection of change, hope and crisis
Introduction
In a global context marked by intersecting crises, uncertainty and growing interdependence, teachers are called upon to find innovative and meaningful ways to stimulate learners’ curiosity about the world. Global citizenship education (GCE) has emerged as a key educational framework to support this task, promoting critical engagement with issues such as social justice, sustainability, human rights and anti-racism. Despite its growing recognition at international and national policy levels, and among scholars (Goren and Yemini, 2017), research on GCE in teacher education continues to highlight a significant gap in teachers’ preparation, particularly in translating GCE concepts and theoretical principles into meaningful pedagogical practices (Tarozzi and Inguaggiato, 2018). Drawing on a qualitative empirical research study, this article explores the processes and challenges involved in implementing GCE in a policy-supported teacher education system. It focuses on the Irish context, examining how GCE is interpreted and enacted within initial teacher education (ITE). In recent years, shifts in political discourse, including forms of nationalism, have created tensions with the principles of GCE, sometimes framing global engagement as a threat to national identity (Tarozzi, 2021, 2025). This is also mirrored across policy decisions, where ‘governments shifted their primary focus to creating and protecting markets rather than concern for something understood as “society” or those things in society that were of common concern’ (Sant et al., 2018, p. 14).
This constant deviation from a values-based approach (Franch, 2020; Tarozzi, 2021) is leading to a deprioritisation of social justice and intercultural understanding in favour of a neoliberal system, lacking critical perspectives on the systemic and structural inequalities still present in the world. This global scenario is affecting education systems across different countries. Although GCE should not be perceived as a panacea or a universal solution, it can provide fundamental frameworks to guide epistemologies and practices towards a transformative education (Gaudelli, 2021; Tarozzi, 2024). Teachers and student teachers, regarded as agents of change (Biesta et al., 2015), could play a crucial role in how future generations make sense of our new global realities. Hence, the teacher must be considered a critical and reflexive educator who navigates these complexities within a formal educational context (Baldacci et al., 2020). For this reason, incorporating GCE frameworks into ITE programmes can equip learners with the knowledge, values, attitudes and skills to teach GCE concepts, thereby scaffolding their confidence and competence to face the layered realities of the modern classroom. This is regarded as an urgent need in our societies and schools (Bamber, 2019; Bourn et al., 2017; Damiani, 2020; Lourenço, 2024; Schugurensky and Wolhuter, 2020). Specifically, ITE, which is considered the foundational context for ensuring educational quality across the entire system (Stuart and Tatto, 2000), is often regarded as lacking a structured integration of GCE (Damiani, 2020). Teachers need more practical and transformative preparation (Bourn et al., 2017) that supports the development of critical reflection on structural inequalities (Andreotti, 2006).
GCE positioning and conceptualisation
In this study, GCE is understood as a critical and transformative educational framework. Drawing on critical perspectives on teacher agency and educational ecosystems, this framework provides the conceptual basis for analysing how GCE is interpreted and implemented within ITE institutions and programmes in Ireland. GCE has become a central element in international education policies, aimed at preparing citizens to engage with global challenges such as social justice, environmental sustainability, global inequality and human rights. In recent decades, international organisations have promoted the integration of GCE by developing policy frameworks and operational definitions, most notably through the Global Education First Initiative (UNESCO, 2012) and the United Nations 2030 Agenda (United Nations, 2015). Within this agenda, GCE is explicitly referenced in Sustainable Development Goal 4.7, which emphasises inclusive and quality education oriented towards global citizenship and sustainable development. At the European level, the Dublin Declaration developed by the Global Education Network Europe (GENE, 2022) has further reinforced a critical and transformative understanding of GCE, highlighting the need to integrate global education across formal, non-formal and informal learning contexts. These international frameworks have influenced national strategies and implementation models, shaping how GCE is adapted to specific socio-cultural contexts. In Ireland, GCE builds on a long-standing tradition of development education (DE) (Dillon et al., 2024), progressively integrated through collaboration between governmental bodies, non-governmental organisations and educational institutions. The evolution of DE/GCE in the Irish context, coupled with the current rich policy context and increased availability of statutory funding, makes Ireland ideally suited for an in-depth qualitive examination of how GCE is enacted in this regard.
As such, GCE is understood in this study as a framework that challenges neutral conceptions of education and foregrounds the role of teachers as reflective agents of change with multi-perspectivity in relation to how the world works, and capable of understanding how their own consciousness is shaped by many of their identity markers. As a result, ITE represents a key site where GCE is interpreted and negotiated. While policy frameworks increasingly emphasise the role of teacher education in promoting GCE (UNESCO, 2015, 2018), research consistently highlights challenges in translating these commitments into coherent pedagogical practices (Bamber, 2019; Bourn et al., 2017; Schugurensky and Wolhuter, 2020). Rather than being implemented as a clearly defined or standardised component, GCE in ITE often emerges through fragmented and mediated processes, shaped by the interaction between policy mandates, institutional structures and professional cultures. Teacher agency plays a crucial role in this process. Teachers and future teachers are not passive recipients of policy frameworks but actively construct meanings around GCE through their professional identities, values and experiences. However, studies indicate that pre-service teachers frequently feel insufficiently prepared to engage critically with GCE or to translate its principles into classroom practice, particularly when support remains largely theoretical or fragmented (Damiani, 2021; Lourenço, 2024). This tension between transformative aspirations and limited pedagogical guidance is a recurring feature of GCE implementation within ITE. Furthermore, in this context GCE is understood not as a discrete curricular element, but as a process shaped by ongoing mediation between global policy discourses and everyday educational practice. This theoretical framework informs the analysis of the Irish case by providing conceptual tools to examine how GCE is mediated, negotiated and enacted within ITE programmes, beyond formal policy commitments.
Background: Irish teacher education and policy context
The Irish teacher education system
In Ireland, ITE is situated within the higher education sector and delivered primarily by publicly funded universities and colleges of education. The system operates within a nationally coordinated framework involving multiple state agencies responsible for governance, accreditation and quality assurance. The Bologna process (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2015; Jakku-Sihvonen et al., 2014) also impacted the Republic of Ireland and influenced its system’s organisation as part of the EU. Irish ITE programmes for primary and post-primary teachers are provided through concurrent (undergraduate) and consecutive (postgraduate) models. Minimum entry requirements for ITE programmes are set by the Minister for Education, in consultation with the Teaching Council. All ITE programmes (primary, post-primary and further education) in Ireland leading to registration must receive professional accreditation from the Teaching Council. This latter institution, in addition to the accreditation, defines learning outcomes and establishes alignment between training and professional standards. These include teaching competencies, subject knowledge, pedagogical skills and professional values. Ireland follows a more decentralised model in which universities, schools and other stakeholders (such as teachers’ unions) play a significant role in shaping teacher education. In this context, the Teaching Council provides a national framework, and individual institutions have greater autonomy in defining the specifics of programmes (Musset, 2010). For ITE programmes in primary education, two main pathways exist:
-
an undergraduate ITE programme, the Bachelor of Education (BEd), which follows a concurrent model, extended to four years since 2012, culminating in an academic degree awarded by a recognised third-level institution
-
a postgraduate course of two years, leading to the professional master of education (PME), which follows a consecutive model requiring candidates to have completed a three- to four-year primary degree at a recognised third-level institution.
Initial teacher education and the Céim standards
This research focuses specifically on the BEd offered by one of the four publicly funded providers of primary ITE in Ireland. In November 2020, the Teaching Council launched revised ITE standards with the introduction of the Céim: Standards for Initial Teacher Education document (Teaching Council, 2020). All new primary and post-primary programmes submitted for accreditation must now align with the core elements as presented in Céim. This fundamental document reformed programme structures and thematic areas for ITE programmes at both primary and post-primary levels. Focusing on the BEd programme for primary school teachers, the main components include foundation studies, professional studies and school placement. Céim further identifies seven pillars for all ITE programmes: inclusive education; global citizenship education; professional relationships and working with parents; professional identity and agency; creativity and reflective practice; literacy and numeracy; and digital skills. The Council ensures that these elements underpin all aspects of ITE programmes, either through foundation studies or professional studies. The introduction of GCE as one of these seven pillars in 2020 symbolises a significant policy departure and provides a very positive and supportive policy context for GCE in ITE. The Teaching Council, as the designated competent authority, regulates the profession and ensures consistency in teacher education policies and professional development. Additionally, in 2012, the BEd for primary teaching was extended to a four-year programme in all teacher education institutions. All ITE providers adhere to policies devised by both the Teaching Council and the Department of Education, while the Higher Education Authority oversees the academic accreditation of ITE programmes (Musset, 2010).
Global citizenship education in Irish policy and practice
Over the past decade, a growing number of events, initiatives and policy documents have influenced the integration and development of GCE within the wider European context, supported by increased government commitment and multi-sectoral collaboration. The development of GCE in Ireland has its roots in intercultural education (ICE) and DE (Bamber, 2019; Bourn et al., 2017; Damiani, 2020; Dillon et al., 2024; Lourenço, 2024; Schugurensky and Wolhuter, 2020). Initially, DE aimed to raise public awareness of global development issues, primarily through non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and voluntary actors. Michael Doorly (2024) describes how this evolution gradually led to DE being absorbed into the broader concept of GCE. Dillon et al. (2024) highlight that the inclusion of GCE was made possible by the contributions of pioneers and by funding from Irish Aid, the Irish government’s overseas development programme within the Department of Foreign Affairs. Moreover, some notable NGOs that helped promote the concepts that later evolved into GCE in Ireland include Concern Worldwide and Trócaire. Irish Aid was established in the 1980s and began supporting DE, an important component of Irish international cooperation, funding a series of educational programmes aimed at both the public and schools, with the goal of increasing awareness of global issues. This led to the foundation of the Irish Development Education Association (IDEA) in 2004. IDEA, the national network for DE in Ireland, acts as a key coordinating body, supporting the integration of GCE across educational sectors and collaborating with government, NGOs and institutions. Moreover, in 2021, Irish Aid published the Global Citizenship Education Strategy 2021–2025 (Irish Aid, 2021), initiated by the Department of Foreign Affairs. This document represents a key milestone in formalising GCE in Ireland, aligning national education strategies with international frameworks such as the 2030 Agenda. A central element of this strategy is the integration of GCE across the continuum of Irish education, including teacher education and the new primary school curriculum, which began rollout in September 2025. This strategy reflects an integrated vision involving both public institutions and civil society, aiming to promote greater awareness of global issues among Irish citizens and encourage meaningful behavioural changes in line with the objectives of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations, 2015). The Dublin Declaration (GENE, 2022) contributes to the development of global education policies across Europe.
The integration of GCE into ITE in Ireland is generally regarded as a success story in terms of how the discipline has been formally embedded in the curricula of teacher education institutions. This process was greatly aided at the institutional level by the introduction of the aforementioned Céim standards. Specifically, Céim identifies GCE as one of the seven pillars of ITE. This implementation is further supported through coordinated initiatives such as the Development and Intercultural Education (DICE) Project, established in 2003. The DICE Project is a national strategic educational initiative in Ireland that promotes the integration of DE and ICE into ITE programmes for future primary school teachers. Also funded by Irish Aid, DICE was established across the four publicly funded teacher education institutions in Ireland: Dublin City University, Marino Institute of Education, Mary Immaculate College and Maynooth University. Each institution has a dedicated lecturer who is responsible for integrating a global dimension into teaching and learning within ITE modules and who also coordinates formal continuous professional development for their teacher educator colleagues on GCE. Lecturers aim to create a learner-centred environment which scaffolds students’ abilities to recognise their individual and collective responsibilities as future global educators. They strive to avoid an ethnocentric and Eurocentric approach to the curriculum, understood as perspectives that prioritise Western knowledge systems and present global issues predominantly through a Global North lens, often marginalising alternative viewpoints. For instance, this may include the representation of development issues primarily through Western narratives or the omission of voices from the Global South. In response, lecturers support students in engaging with multiple perspectives and in recognising the partiality of their own ‘taken-for-granted’ knowledge. They encourage critical reflexivity and the process of ‘unlearning’ previously internalised assumptions.
In the selected BEd programme, GCE is made explicit through two compulsory modules delivered at different stages of the degree, providing the most structured engagement with global citizenship themes. These modules focus on areas such as social justice, sustainability, ICE, human rights and critical reflection, and they adopt participatory and dialogic pedagogical approaches. Student teachers receive 18 hours of GCE lectures in the second year of the BEd programme, 40 in the third year and are offered the opportunity of an 18-hour elective in their final year. This is supplemented with approximately 35 hours of integrated GCE content across the four years of their undergraduate degree. Modules where integration occurs include Social, Personal and Health Education (SPHE) and Social, Environmental and Scientific Education (SESE), both of which are wide-ranging curricular areas with scope to explore relevant GCE themes such as inequality, justice, controversial issues and multi-perspectivity. There is also a discrete focus on GCE concepts and approaches when it comes to professional studies and preparation for school placement. In this context, ‘integration’ refers to the inclusion of GCE-related themes and pedagogical approaches within modules that are not explicitly labelled as GCE. This combination of explicit and cross-curricular provision reflects an attempt to balance dedicated curricular space with a broader programme-wide approach to GCE.
In the primary school context, the National Council for Curriculum Assessment (NCCA) has also played a significant role in developing GCE in Irish primary schools. GCE has been integrated into the school curriculum by fostering collaborations between government bodies, NGOs and higher education institutions. The NCCA leads efforts to incorporate GCE into the national curriculum in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, promoting awareness of global and local responsibilities through ‘active citizenship’. It is important to note that the NCCA (2023) has recently incorporated ‘active citizenship’ as a key competency of the new Primary Curriculum Framework. Additionally, at the primary school level, the Global Village project, a national initiative supporting in-service professional learning for primary teachers, was launched in 2020 as a pilot programme. This initiative mirrors the DICE Project’s efforts, further strengthening Ireland’s commitment to embedding GCE within teacher education and classroom practice.
Methodology
This article draws on a broader qualitative multiple-case study on the implementation of GCE in ITE in Italy and Ireland. This article focuses only on the Irish case, selected as a policy-rich and strategically relevant site within the national landscape of primary ITE. The selected institution was chosen because it is part of the DICE Project and offers both mandatory and elective GCE modules, thus providing a particularly relevant setting for examining how GCE is formally embedded and pedagogically enacted within ITE. This level of programmatic coverage is not typical to all ITE institutions in Ireland, with some providers adopting an entirely integrated approach to GCE content and pedagogical approaches across a wide range of curricular subject areas rather than naming GCE modules in a more overt or literal way. As a result of the visibility of GCE in programme design, as well as the significant number of contact hours for GCE lectures in this setting, it was deemed a suitable subject for a case-study approach.
Participants were recruited through purposive sampling, supplemented with snowball sampling, to involve individuals with direct experience of the ITE programme as well as GCE-related teaching and learning (Yin, 2018). A non-probability approach to sampling was adopted, given that the intention was not to generalise a population but rather to obtain insights into their individual experiences (Onwuegbuzie and Collins, 2007). Data for the Irish study were collected in the 2023/2024 academic year and involved 15 participants: nine final-year pre-service primary teachers and six teacher educators. Sandelowski (1986) recommends that qualitative sample sizes are large enough to allow the unfolding of a ‘new and richly textured understanding’ of the topic, but small enough that the deep, case-oriented analysis is not lost. This balance was taken into account in the sampling decision-making process, and, ultimately, sample size sufficiency was informed primarily by the research aims, as well as logistical and pragmatic considerations.
Data from pre-service teachers were generated through both individual semi-structured interviews and focus groups, whereas teacher educators participated only in individual semi-structured interviews. The focus groups were conducted in two groups and were used to deepen and triangulate issues that had already emerged during the interviews with student teachers.
These different data sources were analysed thematically and brought together through a process of triangulation, allowing for the identification of recurring patterns and convergences across interviews, focus groups and documentary evidence (Yin, 2018). All participants’ names used in the findings are pseudonyms. Additionally, quotations of data collected from participants are identified by codes generated to indicate their role and case study (for example, student teacher; teacher educator; DICE-affiliated educator; Ireland case), thereby ensuring traceability while maintaining confidentiality. The research adopts a qualitative multiple-case study lens (Yin, 2018), and the article examines how the ITE programme in Ireland reflects and operationalises this dimension within its structures, curricula and pedagogical approaches. This contribution focuses on three key categories that emerged from the Irish dataset, illuminating the processes and challenges involved in implementing GCE within university-based teacher education. These three themes emerging from the Irish dataset focus on the curricular implementation of GCE, participants’ reflections on its value and limitations, and the role of practical learning opportunities in shaping its enactment. Specifically, interview and focus group prompts explored participants’ understandings of GCE, where and how they encountered it within the programme, how prepared they felt to teach it and what opportunities and constraints they experienced in enacting it, particularly during school placement. In addition to participant-generated data, documentary sources relating to the Irish policy and programme context were analysed to situate participants’ accounts within the wider institutional and national framework. Documentary sources and field observations were used primarily as contextual and supplementary materials to support case selection, programme mapping and interpretation of participant accounts, rather than as primary analytic data in the findings presented here (Creswell and Poth, 2018; Ravitch and Carl, 2018). Therefore, the article begins to answer the following questions:
-
How is GCE implemented within ITE in Ireland?
-
a.
What are the students’ and teachers’ reflections on how GCE is implemented?
-
b.
What are their experiences related to GCE within ITE?
The data were analysed through an iterative process combining qualitative thematic analysis with elements of qualitative content analysis, following a structuring approach (Kuckartz and Rädiker, 2023). This approach enabled the systematic organisation of data through a process of coding that combined deductive categories derived from the research questions with inductively generated themes emerging from the dataset.
Findings
Building on the broader investigation of teacher education in relation to global challenges, this section focuses specifically on participants’ understandings and experiences of GCE within ITE programmes.
Drawing on the qualitative data collected, the semi-structured interviews and focus groups explored participants’ understandings and conceptualisations of GCE, as well as their experiences of its implementation and enactment within the Irish ITE context, highlighting both structural and experiential dimensions. Attention is given to participants’ preparation for engaging with GCE, the critical issues and limitations they identify and the role of hands-on learning opportunities in shaping their understandings. To capture the complexity of these perspectives, the findings are organised into three interrelated analytical categories:
-
the implementation of GCE within ITE programmes
-
participants’ reflections on their engagement with GCE in ITE
-
wider related experiences as they pertain to GCE.
GCE implementation within ITE programmes
GCE emerges in ITE through multiple and diverse pathways, rather than being a standardised and fully operationalised component of the curriculum. Thus, the first finding reveals how GCE is addressed in ITE through a combination of transdisciplinary approaches, external initiatives and, in this case study, through the provision of mandatory, elective and integrated modules. While some student teachers expressed a desire for the GCE modules to be stand-alone in their entirety, other respondents, particularly the teacher educators, emphasised the value of embedding GCE across a wide range of different subjects to avoid its marginalisation as an isolated topic. Participants consistently identified the GCE modules as the clearest and most explicit spaces in which GCE was addressed within the programme. These modules were seen as offering a more coherent engagement with themes such as social justice, climate change or critical reflection, while GCE input in other areas of the curriculum was described as more uneven and often implicit. In this sense, although cross-curricular integration was widely valued, students often associated the dedicated modules with greater conceptual clarity, whereas teacher educators were more likely to emphasise the pedagogical value of embedding GCE across the programme rather than confining it to stand-alone provision.
As one participant noted, treating GCE as a transversal competence allows it to become ‘part of everyday teaching rather than a separate concern’. At the level of programme structure, participants frequently identified a single, dedicated GCE course as the most visible and coherent entry point for engaging with global topics, reinforced by national policy developments. As already outlined, in the Irish case study, participants complete two mandatory GCE modules during their degree while also having access to elective modules and integrated inputs across other curricular areas. Teacher educators described how GCE gained formal standing through the Céim accreditation framework, which increased its visibility and helped secure additional curricular space across programmes. Across the interview and focus-group data, several student teachers similarly positioned the compulsory GCE modules as a distinctive and often transformative element of their preparation, emphasising their topicality and the opportunities they provided for discussion, engagement and participatory methodologies. At the same time, participants also noted a continuing need to balance this ‘single course’ model with broader cross-curricular integration; as Mánus observed, ‘there’s a balance between GCE being a subject and being integrated across the curriculum’. Some students acknowledged the synergies with and inputs in other modules (for example, SPHE/SESE), yet they also stressed that the articulation of GCE was not always as explicit as it was in the two mandatory modules.
External seminars, projects, volunteering opportunities and networks were frequently identified as meaningful spaces for experiential and transformative learning, yet their impact largely depended on individual initiative rather than systemic support. In the Irish context, participants repeatedly referred to the DICE Project funding as a key mechanism for GCE implementation in that it supports guest speakers from minoritised and racialised backgrounds, and provides resources and inter-institutional collaboration. Overall, the findings point to a pattern of integration without full institutionalisation: GCE is present and valued within the ITE programme under examination, but it remains unevenly enacted across modules, with coherence often provided through the DICE lecturer, other specific actors, projects and policy windows rather than through a fully aligned programme-wide design.
Reflection about GCE in ITE: awareness, limits and tensions
Participants’ reflections on GCE within Irish ITE programmes revealed a strong awareness of its educational importance and value, alongside persistent tensions related to institutional support, conceptual clarity and practical implementation.
Limitations
Irish participants frequently identified systemic and organisational constraints shaping their engagement with GCE. Some teacher educators, in their individual interviews, pointed to a lack of shared understanding and commitment at the programme-management level. As Riona noted, while GCE is formally acknowledged within the curriculum, it often remains weakly supported in practice and risks being treated as an individual responsibility rather than a collective priority.
Student teachers similarly highlighted the difficulty of challenging entrenched perspectives within school contexts, for example while out on school placement. As Fionnuala (S03UII) remarked, ‘people have assumptions, and it’s kind of hard to change them’. These observations underscore a perceived gap between the transformative aspirations of GCE and the realities of conservative school cultures encountered during placement.
Awareness of the importance of GCE
Despite these challenges, Irish participants consistently expressed a strong belief in the relevance and necessity of GCE for becoming an active global citizen. Many student teachers emphasised the need for greater awareness among teacher educators and schoolteachers, suggesting that they may already engage with GCE-related themes without explicitly recognising them as such (Fergus, S04UII).
At the same time, participants acknowledged the emotional and professional courage required to implement GCE, particularly for newly qualified teachers. Gráinne described feeling equipped with theoretical tools but uncertain about how to introduce GCE without ‘rocking the boat’ in school settings. This emphasis on confidence and bravery was echoed by Fergus, who linked effective GCE implementation to professional experience and ongoing learning. Teacher educators reinforced the importance of fostering deep personal commitment to GCE. As Cillian argued, global citizenship cannot be taught without genuine belief and value formation, which requires time and reflective space within ITE programmes. Similarly, Mánus highlighted the need to create curricular and institutional space for addressing societal issues that resonate within classrooms.
Across both groups, GCE was framed not merely as curricular content but as an ethical and professional stance, which supported them to articulate their core values in this regard. Participants repeatedly stressed its relevance to contemporary society and to the role of teachers as mediators of global awareness, social responsibility and critical engagement.
Experiences of GCE
Participants’ experiences of GCE within Irish ITE programmes emerged primarily through teaching placements and, to a lesser extent, international or overseas projects. These experiences were described as key moments in which GCE shifted from an abstract concept to a lived and pedagogical practice, albeit in uneven and often contingent ways.
Placement experiences
Teaching placements in primary schools represented the most frequently cited experiential context for engaging with GCE among Irish student teachers. Participants described implementing GCE-related activities mainly when school cultures, mentor teachers or curricular priorities explicitly supported such themes. As Ailbhe observed, the opportunity to address GCE during placement was highly dependent on the host school. ‘Some of your schools might be more focused on global citizenship education than others. Whenever you’re on placement, you can see…’
Several student teachers highlighted their limited autonomy during placements, noting that opportunities to address GCE often depended on whether the class teacher explicitly invited or supported such content or what specific areas of the curriculum they had been asked to cover during this time. As one participant explained, ‘it’s something that has to be already in the class. It’s hard to do it on placement’. This constraint echoes the broader pattern of partial and uneven institutionalisation discussed in the previous section.
Despite these limitations, some participants described meaningful and impactful teaching experiences. For instance, Oonagh recounted delivering lessons on human rights to senior primary pupils, supported by university resources, and emphasised the strong engagement of children with global justice issues. Similarly, Fionnuala described teaching about Nigeria using intercultural materials provided during her ITE programme, noting how such activities were ‘eye-opening’ for pupils. Áine’s experience in an Educate Together school, a particular type of co-educational school with a multi-denominational and equality-based ethos, further illustrated the potential of placement contexts to foster critical engagement with diversity. Her curricular work on the Traveller community, Ireland’s indigenous ethnic minority, prompted discussions around racism and social exclusion, highlighting how pupils’ lived experiences shaped their openness to GCE-related themes. Across these accounts, the support of the DICE lecturer and access to pedagogical resources emerged as enabling factors in the translation of GCE theory into classroom practice. Overall, placement experiences functioned as situated and relational learning spaces for GCE, yet their impact remained highly dependent on school contexts and individual initiative rather than being systematically embedded within the ITE structure.
Experiences abroad
In contrast to placement experiences, international or overseas engagements (sometimes referred to as ‘sending programmes’) were mentioned less frequently by Irish participants and primarily by teacher educators. This is mainly because the particular research site, the university, while involved in a long-term professional partnership in this regard, does not support the participation of student teachers in international service-learning placements until after their graduation. The participants who subsequently participated in such immersive field experiences, however, described them as particularly powerful and transformative, and as aligning with the knowledge, skills, values and attitudes that characterise a GCE approach. Two teacher educators referred to projects enabling student teachers to gain teaching or volunteering experience in Global South contexts. Riona explained her role in supporting students undertaking voluntary work overseas, describing it as an inherited but ongoing responsibility within the programme. Similarly, Sadhbh (P02UII) highlighted the educational value of the same project, emphasising its capacity to render global inequalities tangible and lived and to apply her previous abstract knowledge to a concrete experience: ‘It’s no longer abstract; it’s no longer considered to be theoretical, it’s applicable, it’s real.’
These accounts resonate with student teachers’ broader emphasis on experiential and embodied learning, even though access to such opportunities remain limited and context-specific, depending on the teacher education programme in which a student may be enrolled. Given that not all ITE providers are involved in international sending programmes, these global experiences were framed as exceptional rather than integral components of Irish ITE programmes, reinforcing the pattern of experiential richness without structural coherence identified across the findings.
Discussion
The recent proliferation of academic studies and policy initiatives in the area of GCE indicates a growing recognition of its necessity and legitimacy within formal education (Bourn, 2020, p. 20; Goren and Yemini, 2017; Sant et al., 2018). Nonetheless, the preparation and subsequent understanding of concepts related to GCE remain strongly shaped by the educational systems and policy frameworks governing its integration into curricula at the formal level (Schugurensky and Wolhuter, 2020). Consequently, contexts in which GCE is explicitly embedded in educational policies and supported through targeted funding tend to provide more effective preparation for teachers (Tarozzi and Inguaggiato, 2018). At the same time, persistent challenges continue to characterise GCE within ITE, including difficulties in integrating concepts coherently, the risk of fragmented provision and long-standing ambiguities surrounding definitions and pedagogical approaches. Drawing on empirical data from an Irish ITE programme, this study examines how these challenges are experienced and negotiated by student teachers and teacher educators within a context where GCE is successfully embedded into the modules and lived experience of the institution. Against this background, this study examines how GCE is implemented, understood and experienced within Irish ITE programmes, focusing on the ways in which formal policy integration is mediated through curricular structures, student teachers’ perceptions and formative experiences.
In this regard, existing research shows that GCE is rarely developed as an autonomous educational pathway (Barry, 2020; Barry et al., 2024). More commonly, it is addressed through adjacent fields such as civic education, ICE or sustainable development education, often without a shared or coherent framework. The overlap between these domains can make integration within disciplinary curricula challenging, frequently resulting in GCE being positioned as an additional or stand-alone course (Bourn et al., 2017). Despite the prevalence of integrated approaches, however, recent literature also points to a gradual process of recognising GCE as an independent discipline within formal educational contexts (Sant et al., 2018). Against this backdrop, the present study offers an in-depth illustration of this emerging possibility through the Irish case, where GCE has been integrated as a mandatory component of ITE in its own right. Following increased institutional recognition through Céim and Irish Aid-funded initiatives, GCE is now a requirement for Teaching Council accreditation in Ireland (Dillon et al., 2024). Within this context, teacher educators emerge as key mediators between policy expectations and everyday pedagogical practice, playing a central role in shaping how GCE is interpreted, prioritised and enacted within ITE programmes.
As a result, participants in this study were generally able to clearly identify where and how GCE was referenced within the curriculum, although some uncertainty regarding its enactment remained. This was often linked to the role of placement schools and mentor teachers, whose support was crucial in creating (or limiting) opportunities for student teachers to implement and reflect on GCE in practice.
Over recent decades, a range of networks and projects have further reinforced this process of integration, most notably the DICE Project, which has focused on DE and ICE while actively engaging university teacher educators in embedding GCE principles and values within ITE curricula. Taken together, these developments point to a clear and explicit institutional recognition of GCE within Irish ITE programmes (Bourn, 2024). Alongside these structural developments, the findings indicate a strong interest in, and commitment to, GCE among student teachers. Participants consistently recognised the importance of GCE and expressed high levels of personal motivation to engage with global issues in their future professional practice. Nevertheless, this interest does not automatically translate into confidence or clarity. Despite the formal integration of GCE within the curriculum, some student teachers reported ongoing doubts regarding competing language and terminology, and their ability to translate their newly acquired GCE knowledge into effective classroom practice. At the same time, Irish student teachers also highlighted how policy-level implementation and curricular recognition positively shaped their perceived preparedness for engaging with GCE, suggesting that formal structures play a significant role in legitimising and supporting their engagement.
Taken together, these findings point to a key tension between the formal recognition of GCE within ITE and student teachers’ ongoing uncertainty about how to translate this recognition into confident and coherent pedagogical practice in their future careers. Within this context, hands-on learning opportunities emerge as a key element in strengthening student teachers’ confidence and sense of preparedness. Irish participants consistently identified placement experiences as particularly influential in shaping their understanding of and engagement with GCE. These accounts highlight how experiential opportunities function as key sites where abstract understandings of GCE are translated into pedagogical practice. Learning through experience is widely recognised as central to GCE, as it facilitates deeper engagement with global issues and supports the development of critical awareness (Caccioppola, 2022). In ITE programmes, experiential learning is particularly significant in enabling student teachers to engage with complex and contested topics in meaningful ways (Bamber, 2019). Research has shown that pre-service teachers who participate in direct global or immersive active learning opportunities tend to develop a stronger awareness of GCE and a greater propensity to integrate it into their teaching practice (Bamber, 2019).
Beyond knowledge acquisition, such experiences also play an important role in shaping professional identity. As highlighted by Lourenço (2024), engagement with GCE through lived experiences can contribute to the development of teachers as ‘agents of change’, with transformative effects on their professional values and ethos. These experiences foster forms of engagement that become embedded in teachers’ identities and ethical commitments (Tarozzi, 2014), although this process is neither immediate nor guaranteed. Rather, the transformation associated with GCE-related experiences is gradual and requires sustained institutional support in order to be consolidated within teachers’ professional trajectories (Lourenço, 2024). The findings of the present study reflect this complexity. Placements were described as key spaces where student teachers encountered GCE-related themes in classroom practice and began to experiment with their integration. At the same time, participants also pointed to the limitations of these experiences, noting restricted autonomy in topic selection and limited responsibility for designing and leading GCE-related initiatives during these short-term placements. These constraints highlight the need for placements to be more intentionally aligned with GCE aims, rather than relying on incidental or individual opportunities.
Addressing these challenges requires sustained investment in teacher educators’ preparation and in the pedagogical coherence of ITE programmes. The adoption of interactive and participatory methodologies – such as structured discussion spaces and collaborative learning activities – can support a more critical and applied engagement with GCE, ensuring that experiential learning becomes an integral and supported component of teacher education rather than an external or optional addition (Dillon et al., 2024). In this respect, participants did not call for the mere introduction of GCE into the curriculum – given its already mandatory status – but rather for greater continuity and depth, through increased hours (particularly in the final year of their programme) and more sustained engagement across different stages of the programme. Overall, this study highlights a central tension in the Irish case: while GCE is institutionally embedded within ITE, its meaningful enactment depends on how policy, pedagogy and experience are aligned within teacher education programmes.
By foregrounding the perceptions and experiences of student teachers, the findings underscore the importance of context-sensitive, participatory and programmatically coherent approaches to GCE implementation. Rather than focusing solely on formal inclusion, meaningful integration requires paying attention to how GCE is enacted, supported and experienced within everyday pedagogical practices (Bourn et al., 2017; Yemini et al., 2019).
Conclusion
Developing powerful teacher education is complex and multifaceted. Darling-Hammond (2006) maintains that despite all the evidence that student teachers benefit from learning about their craft, it is also true that many of them still feel underprepared for the real challenges they face when they enter their own classrooms in the future. As a result, she suggests that it is the type of teacher education they receive that matters (Darling-Hammond, 2006), and this is especially true when it comes to teaching the discomforting issues (Boler, 1999) or difficult knowledge (Pitt and Britzman, 2003) that are synonymous with GCE. In this instance, the formal integration of GCE into ITE in Ireland can be regarded as a dynamic process, where students are supported with alternative and holistic ways of reading and understanding how the world works through innovative teaching and pedagogy. Dialogic and supportive spaces, creative and non-didactic methodologies, and a commitment to critical reflection go a long way to bringing pre-service teachers to a place where they can envision taking effective action for a more just, equitable and sustainable world. Ireland is in a fortunate position where the supportive policy and funding landscape has enabled GCE to become securely embedded in ITE programmes as well as the ethos and lived experience of the learners. The ongoing development of meaningful GCE in the Irish context will, however, depend on the close alignment of policy, curriculum, pedagogical choices and experience, rather than on formal inclusion alone.
Declarations and conflicts of interest
Research ethics statement
The authors declare that research ethics approval for this article was obtained in accordance with institutional ethical guidelines.
Consent for publication statement
The authors declare that research participants’ informed consent to publication of findings – including photos, videos and any personal or identifiable information – was secured prior to publication.
Conflicts of interest statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest with this work. All efforts to sufficiently anonymise the authors during peer review of this article have been made. The authors declare no further conflicts with this article.
References
Andreotti,V d O. (2006). Soft versus critical global citizenship education. Development Education Review 3 :40–51. https://www.developmenteducationreview.com/issue/issue-3/soft-versus-critical-global-citizenship-education.
Baldacci,M; Riva,M G; Nigris,E. (2020). Idee per la formazione degli insegnanti. FrancoAngeli, pp.1–148.
Bamber,P. (2019). Teacher education for sustainable development and global citizenship: Critical perspectives on values, curriculum and assessment. Taylor & Francis, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780429427053
Barry,M. (2020). Global challenges, global citizenship: What is the local classroom reality? A qualitative case study of global citizenship education teaching and learning practices. PhD thesis. Dublin City University. https://doras.dcu.ie/24983/.
Barry,M; Waldron,F; Bryan,A. (2024). Understanding global citizenship education in the classroom: A case study of teaching practices. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 20 (3) :397–416, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17461979241278644
Biesta,G; Priestley,M; Robinson,S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching 21 (6) :624–640, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325
Boler,M. (1999). A pedagogy of discomfort: Witnessing and the politics of anger and fear. Feeling power: Emotions and education. Routledge, pp.175–203.
Bourn,D. (2020). Global and development education and global skills. Educar 56 (2) :279–295, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.1143
Bourn,D. (2024). International global education policy and practice: Lessons from and for Ireland. Global education in Ireland. Dillon,E, Gaynor,N;Nand McCann,G;G, McCloskey,SS(ed s .), Bloomsbury Academic, pp.120–128. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/global-education-in-ireland-9781350380387/.
Bourn,D; Hunt,F; Bamber,P. (2017). A review of education for sustainable development and global citizenship education in teacher education. UNESCO GEM background paper [Report]. UNESCO. http://gem-report-2017.unesco.org/en/background-papers/.
Caccioppola,F. (2022). L’Educazione alla cittadinanza globale sotto l’aspetto semantico: Una review sistematica. Formazione & Insegnamento 20 (3) :103–121.
Creswell,J W; Poth,C N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. 4th ed. Sage.
Damiani,V. (2020). Educating pre-service teachers on global citizenship: Research perspectives from a preliminary study in the Italian context. JSSE Journal of Social Science Education 19 (4) :4. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4119/jsse-3468
Damiani,V. (2021). Global citizenship education for pre-service teachers in Italy: Insights and research developments. EERA European Educational Research Association. https://eera-ecer.de/ecer-programmes/conference/26/contribution/50343.
Darling-Hammond,L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education 57 (2) :120–138, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487105283796
Dillon,E, Gaynor,N;Nand McCann,G;G, McCloskey,SS(ed s .), . (2024). Global education in Ireland. Bloomsbury Academic. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/global-education-in-ireland-9781350380387/.
Doorly,M. (2024). From development education to global citizenship education. Global education in Ireland. Dillon,E, Gaynor,N;Nand McCann,G;G, McCloskey,SS(ed s .), Bloomsbury Academic, pp.20–28. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/global-education-in-ireland-9781350380387/.
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2015). The European higher education area in 2015: Bologna process implementation report. Publications Office of the European Union. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/european-higher-education-area-2015-bologna-process-implementation-report_en.
Franch,S. (2020). Global citizenship education: A new ‘moral pedagogy’ for the 21st century?. European Educational Research Journal 19 (6) :506–524, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474904120929103
Gaudelli,W. (2021). Flourishing and global citizenship education. Conversations on global citizenship education. Bosio,E(ed.), Routledge, pp.137–152. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429346897-10/flourishing-global-citizenship-education-william-gaudelli.
GENE. (2022). European declaration on global education to 2050—The Dublin Declaration—A European strategy framework for improving and increasing global education in Europe to the year 2050, https://www.gene.eu/ge2050-congress.
Goren,H; Yemini,M. (2017). Global citizenship education redefined: A systematic review of empirical studies on global citizenship education. International Journal of Educational Research 82 :170–183, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.02.004
Irish Aid. (2021). Global citizenship education strategy 2021–2025. Irish Aid.
Jakku-Sihvonen,R; Tissari,V; Ots,A; Uusiautti,S. (2014). Teacher education curricula after the Bologna process: A comparative analysis of written curricula in Finland and Estonia. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 56 (3) :261–275, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2011.581687
Kuckartz,U; Rädiker,S. (2023). Qualitative content analysis. Sage Publications, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781036212940
Lourenço,M. (2024). ‘Brave’ teacher education for global citizenship. Educação, Sociedade & Culturas 67 :1–19.
Musset,P. (2010). Initial teacher education and continuing training policies in a comparative perspective: Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review on potential effects [Working Paper]. OECD. https://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/handle/20.500.12799/2522.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2023). Primary curriculum framework for primary and special schools. NCCA.
Onwuegbuzie,A; Collins,K. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report 12 (2) :281–316.
Pitt,A; Britzman,D. (2003). Speculations on qualities of difficult knowledge in teaching and learning: An experiment in psychoanalytic research. Qualitative Studies in Education 16 (6) :755–776, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09518390310001632135
Ravitch,S M; Carl,N M. (2018). Qualitative research: Bridging the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Sage.
Sandelowski,M. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science 8 (3) :27–37, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00012272-198604000-00005 3083765
Sant,E; Ian,D; Pashby,K; Shultz,L. (2018). Global citizenship education: A critical introduction to key concepts and debates. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/global-citizenship-education-a-critical-introduction-to-key-concepts-and-debates-9781472592422/.
Schugurensky,D; Wolhuter,C. (2020). Global citizenship education in teacher education: Theoretical and practical issues. Routledge, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781351129848
Stuart,J S; Tatto,M T. (2000). Designs for initial teacher preparation programs: An international view. International Journal of Educational Research 33 (5) :493–514, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0883-0355(00)00031-8
Tarozzi,M. (2014). Building an ‘intercultural ethos’ in teacher education. Intercultural Education 25 (2) :128–142, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2014.888804
Tarozzi,M. (2021). Educating for global citizenship in diverse and unequal societies. Conversations on global citizenship education. Bosio,E(ed.), Routledge, pp.89–102.
Tarozzi,M. (2024). ECG: Dal ‘che cosa’ al ‘come mi posiziono’. 4 Idealtipi di ECG. GLOCITED: Editorial series on global citizenship education. UNESCO, pp.1–9. https://unescochairgced.it/glocited/ecg-dal-che-cosa-al-come-mi-posiziono/.
Tarozzi,M. (2025). Coltivare la speranza: Percorsi di educazione alla cittadinanza globale. Il Mulino.
Tarozzi,M; Inguaggiato,C. (2018). Implementing global citizenship education in EU primary schools: The role of government ministries. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning 10 (1) :1.
Teaching Council. (2020). Céim: Standards for initial teacher education, https://www.teachingcouncil.ie/professional-learning/initial-teacher-education/ceim-standards-for-initial-teacher-education/.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development., https://unric.org/it/agenda-2030/.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2012). Education first: The United Nations secretary-general’s initiative on education (190 EX/INF.5). UNESCO.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2015). Global citizenship education: Topics and learning objectives. Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’éducation, la science et la culture. UNESCO. https://inspirecitizens.org/s/unesco_gced-Topics-and-Learning-Objectives.pdf.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2018). Preparing teachers for global citizenship education: A template. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000265452.
Yemini,M; Tibbitts,F; Goren,H. (2019). Trends and caveats: Review of literature on global citizenship education in teacher training. Teaching and Teacher Education 77 :77–89, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.09.014
Yin,R K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications.