See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/357448849

Teaching history in a global age

Article in History Education Research Journal · October 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 753

3 authors, including:

Antonis Hourdakis Tien-Hui Chiang

University of Crete RC04, International Sociological Association UNESCO
17 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS 53 PUBLICATIONS 296 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Antonis Hourdakis on 31 December 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

History Education Research Journal Hourdakis, A., Calogiannakis, P. and Chiang, T. (2018) ‘Teaching
history in a global age’. History Education Research Journal,
15 (2): 153–166. DOI https://doi.org/10.18546/HERJ.15.2.12

Teaching history in a global age

Anthony Hourdakis* – University of Crete, Greece
Pella Calogiannakis – University of Crete, Greece, and Zhengzhou University,
China
Tien-Hui Chiang – Zhengzhou University, China

Abstract
Researchers in the teaching of modern global history generally focus on historical
issues that have reshaped our world, including decolonization, social democracies,
revolutions, terrorism, religions, competition in labour markets and the role of
superpowers. This article attempts to explore global study through which young
people may understand both the outside world and themselves. The aim is to
reframe the way in which history is taught in schools, seeing it as part of the whole
curriculum that makes a contribution to both the values of personal development
and to citizenship with a focus on the world’s history. History needs to develop
a political intelligence through teaching global history. Based upon the paper’s
theoretical framework, curriculum developers can create global history syllabuses
and pedagogies.

Keywords: citizenship; critical thinking; cross-cultural interaction; global history;

history teaching

Introduction
Historical knowledge and understanding is a precondition of political intelligence.
History education teaches students to examine controversial issues through studying
primary and secondary sources, to consider the validity of historical evidence, to
discuss the causes and effects of changes over time and to understand why there are
different interpretations of the past (Slater, 1995; Stradling, 2003: 13). Our aim is both to
consider curricular issues at a national level and to suggest a new approach to global
history as an integral part of the curriculum to support students making connections
across world history – to encourage them to ask questions and to examine human
history through social, cultural or economic lenses. The emphasis should be on critical
thinking and on global human values (Geyer and Bright, 1995: 1,037; Burns, 2006:
368). In contrast, school global history today predominantly highlights an ethnocentric
narrative that aims to cultivate national consciousness, rather than promote critical
thinking and multi-ethnic and multicultural awareness. Students usually passively
assimilate this national master narrative as uncontested historical truth. Nothing in its
content indicates that its authors have selected, interpreted and constructed it as an
interpretation (Coulby, 1995; Jenkins, 1997).
As well as their own culture, students should appreciate the world’s many other
cultures, and recognize that there is a long history of common problems across them.
Naturally, current problems do not reproduce those of the past. However, many
aspects of modern global history are centred around crucial historical issues and
emerging problems that have reshaped our world: decolonization, social democracies

*Corresponding author – email: [email protected] ©Copyright 2018 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang. This
is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
154 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

and reforms, revolutions, wars, terrorism, war crimes, religious conflicts, competition in
free-market economies, and ultimately globalization and the role of superpowers (Turk
et al., 2014: 3).
Analysis of current issues, based on relevant historical evidence and knowledge
of the histories of the world’s cultures can contribute to the promotion of the mutual
understanding, respect and citizenship that are required in our increasingly pluralistic
society. This knowledge will contribute not only to the education of students as global
citizens, but also to their individual development. Historical memory is the key to self-
identification, to seeing one’s position in time and connection with all humankind
(NCHS, 1995; Slater, 1995: 143–8).
Hence, it is high time to redefine history and history education in a global era,
through thinking inclusively and universally. Many argue that the idea of ‘political
intelligence’ arises as a need for students to learn about the interconnection of
cultures, while recognizing they grow up in countries each of which has a particular
national past, culture, beliefs, values and governance. Therefore, they first need to
learn to think critically about and understand their own culture. World history is a
history without a specific geographical focus, but if we start from the local, it provides
national, regional and global perspectives (Peyrot, 1986: 337; 1999: 21; Moniot, 1993).
Collingwood (1946: 282–302) states that the goal of history is not just to understand an
event but also the idea expressed in it. Local history enables children to learn to carry
out historical enquiries, starting with questions and questioning. Local history enables
them to make links between past and present culture, society and changes through
time. If children learn to think historically about their own locality, later on they can they
learn to make connections between local, national and global communities, applying
the processes of critical, historical thinking that they have learned.

Towards a theory of global history

Critique of current history education
In recent decades, the rapid transformation of living conditions has made it necessary to
take a new look at the past. The globalization of issues, concerns, values and problems,
from the demographic, sociopolitical, environmental and cultural perspectives has
called into question the orientation of traditional historiography, with its focus on the
history of Western Europe and the Mediterranean (Coulby, 1995). More specifically,
surveys carried out in Greece to ascertain whether the European and global dimensions
were represented in history teaching, found stereotypical images of foreigners and
few universal themes. Greek history programmes strongly reflect the traditional view
of its national past (Apostolidou, 2017: 2). Similarly, in England the history curriculum
is based on local, regional, national and international perspectives, but with a clear
English focus (DfE, 2013). History curricula that do not address the cultural pluralism
that characterizes our world are clearly inadequate. They superficially treat issues
arising from racial and ethnic discrimination without consideration of their wider
political, economic, cultural and social context in the non-Western world. (Robbins,
1993; Farnen, 1994; Ivrideli et al., 2003). Table 1 gives examples of historical content
that is frequently studied and the dimensions of that content that are often omitted.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 155

Table 1: Historical content that is frequently studied and the dimensions of that
content that are often omitted

We have often studied: but not:

the past of the West the past of the world
the past of nations the cultural and educational connections
between them
the past of white peoples the past of peoples of colour
the past of ethnic majorities the past of ethnic minorities and refugees
the past of men and the powerful peoples of gender history, history of the weak and
the world hindered peoples of the world
the past in general its connection with/relation to the present
and future
While on the epistemological level,
We usually emphasize: but not:
the history of teaching the history of learning
the history of mind the history of body and feelings (focus
on conceptual history and historical
constructivism)
the history of ideas/thought the history of consciousness
the history of particular systems and the history of manners and the crisis
institutions response (manners are an indication of
profounder virtues: sensitivity, community
spirit and moral strength)
the history of legislation the social history (focus on opinion), folk-
memories (focus on stereotypes),
international perspectives (identification
of trends)

Without including the content in the second column of Table 1, global history
curricula do not reflect and include key global issues that students need to consider
and understand. This concern reframes both what and how global history should
be taught in schools, raising the fundamental problem that developers of national
curricula marginalize, or even totally ignore, the global dimension. But, as an element
in school curricula, we specifically prescribe a global history curriculum concerned
with connections between the national, international and global – the main theme
of this paper. As such, a global approach to the history of the world represents an
important educational innovation and development. Distinctively, even uniquely,
it deals both with the entire world rather than with a particular region, country or
continent, and with all mankind’s past, as opposed to the past of Western or non-
Western oriented jurisdictions (Hourdakis, 1996; Mazlish and Buultjens, 1993: 1,
113ff.; Friedman, 2007).

Global and world history

Global history is distinguished from other types of history in that it centres on humanity
as a whole. Not all that is called world history is global history. Global history deals with
themes that involve ‘big structures, large processes and huge comparisons’, and must
be research-oriented (Schäfer, 1993: n.p.). On the contrary, world history is frequently

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

156 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

a label for a collection of narratives of particular nations, or regions, which emphasize

the uniqueness and superiority of each, and draw none or few generalizations that
cut across narrow, regional lines (Engle, 1971: 438–42; Mazlish, 1998: 385–95; Barnes,
2015). Moreover, most world history texts present a Western point of view with a major
imbalance of content, and as such are strongly biased with distorted perspectives
(see Table 1) (Kishlansky et al., 1995; Craig et al., 1997; Reddy, 2001; Pomeranz, 2002:
539–90; Rosenwein, 2010; Singer, 2011: 77–87; Scheer, 2012).
Such world history presents itself as how to study the world’s past. Accordingly,
it does not emphasize linkages between societies over large areas. Moreover, it fails to
discuss how people in different places and times have come up with unique solutions
to common problems. It promotes the ideal of cultural homogeneity, which has been
constructed from the idea of the European nation state, and projects it on to the
history of the Third World countries. Additionally, it uses concepts and unit analysis
more appropriate to nation states than to an integrated modern polity. It pays no
attention to discussion about global and local interactions. In addition, it uses terms
such as ‘emergence’, ‘crisis’, ‘rebirth’, ‘reformation’ and ‘intellectual revolution’ that are
appropriate in their Western, European context. These concepts are represented by
far less forceful words in other civilizations. The prevalent themes in world history arise
from a military, economic and political point of view, and other important themes, such
as philosophy, culture, ideology, war crimes and religion, are unacceptably excluded
(Gills and Thompson, 2006: 44ff.). World history considers women, often disregarded in
history textbooks, but condescendingly looks at them mainly from the perspective of
Western conceptualization of women. Finally, concepts such as progress or exploitation
are also usually omitted, while if integration is discussed, it is almost solely from a
Western economic perspective (Singer, 2011: 77–87).

Approaching global history

The global approach to the history of the world attempted here represents a significant
departure from modern educational practice. The distinctive feature of this approach
is that it deals with the entire world, rather than with a particular country or region.
It deals not only with the history of Western man, but also with that of all humanity
(Hourdakis, 1996; Mazlish and Buultjens, 1993: 1, 113ff.; Friedman, 2007). Mazlish
(2006: 109), writing about globalization, refers to the exploitation of space, satellite
communications, multinational corporations, environmental problems and nuclear
threats and terrorism. Mazlish and Iriye (2005: 254) see terrorism as an excellent topic
through which to examine many contradictory aspects of globalization. In global
history, there is a focus on the whole system. As a cross-cultural, transnational and
interdisciplinary field of research, it tries to investigate the emergence and present
character of multiple local activities that have worldwide connections, consequence
and significance.

Questions arising in teaching global history

Of course, a global approach is not without difficulties (Schäfer, 1993; Engle, 1971:
438–42). For example, scholars ask whether or not a ‘global history’ should try to cover
the history of the entire world, or should it focus on those areas where different cultures
interact across large regions? Cross-cultural interactions began to influence human
affairs from the earliest times, and perhaps they should be the basis for establishing a
periodization of world history (Brown, 1987: 239–311).

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 157

As historians view the past from broad, comparative and global viewpoints,
they will have to consider the role of cross-cultural interactions (Bentley, 1996: 770),
and patterns of continuity and change that reflect the experiences of many, but not
all, people (ibid.: 750). When historians and teachers approach the past from global
points of view, and examine procedures that cross the boundary lines of societies
and cultural regions, the problems of periodization become more difficult. Historians
have realized that periodization based on the experiences of Western civilization, or
any other particular civilization, do not adequately explain the processes of change
in others. The problems of periodization are still present even when historians take
global approaches to the past and analyse human experiences from extensive and
comparative perspectives (Bentley, 1996: 749–50; Singer, 2011: 39).
A new global history can be based on two basic propositions. First, we should
free ourselves from a traditional viewpoint that locks history up within national
boundaries. According to Tait (2015), it is important for students (and politicians)
to accept that history is not the private property of any one nation, and that, while
we were once taught that our views were ‘the truth’, thanks to the dissemination of
knowledge and the World Wide Web, we are no longer so naive. Second, new global
history necessitates using diverse historical sources. Historians have tried to find a way
to apply the methods of enquiry of history as a discipline to global history. This involves
the establishment of methods of classifying and organizing the excessive amount of
historical information available so as to recognize patterns of continuity, development
and change.
It is often argued that only by understanding substantive concepts such as
‘nation’, ‘society’, ‘culture’ and ‘education’ as bundles of relationships, and by replacing
them in the field from which they were abstracted, can we hope to avoid misleading
inferences and to increase understanding. Many of us grew up believing that the West
has a chronological genealogy, according to which ancient Greece begot Rome, Rome
begot Christian Europe, Christian Europe begot the Renaissance, the Renaissance
the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment political democracy and the Industrial
Revolution (Singer, 2011: 39ff., 77–87). The American Revolution, and industrialization
combined with democracy, helped to shape a nation state of the United States of
America that embodied the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This view
of the Western world’s developmental genealogical chronology from ‘Plato to Nato’ is
misleading because it turns history into a moral success story, a race in time in which
each runner passes on the torch of Western civilization to the next in the relay.
History is thus converted into a tale about the furtherance and development of
virtue, about how the virtuous win out over the evil ones. Frequently, this turns into
a tautology whereby the winners prove that they are virtuous and good by winning.
The point is more than academic. By endowing nations, societies or cultures with the
qualities of internal homogeneity and externally distinctive boundaries, we create a
model of the world as a global pool hall, in which the entities spin off each other like
hard, round billiard balls (Wolf, 1982: 3–7). Wolf explains that the notion of separate
cultures is no longer valid. Global interaction has modified and transformed all cultures
with their discrete regional origins, and none of them remain in their pristine state.
Here, global history as explanation of the present is radical revisionist history.
As already argued, global history rebuts the misunderstanding, distortion and
misinterpretation of world history. Knowledge of what Nietzsche (1976: 12–17) termed
‘critical history’ is required; this can contribute to the creation of personality, by
understanding its emergence in the course of human history (Leont’ev, 1994: 9–13).
From the perspective of critical theory, in the realization of identity and personality,

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

158 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

the most important category is history – not society, not even emancipation. In each
period of human history, personal identity has been produced under different social
conditions, and thus itself became different. There is no such thing as an ahistoric
human identity. That is why critical pedagogy examines the quality of the present social
and cultural environment of Western society as the condition for the development of
humanity (Newman and Holzman, 1993: 106ff.; Wertsch et al., 1995). Today, we need
teachers who are able to act as agents for global change. History is probably one of the
subjects that can educate students to be empathetic, and have mutual understanding
and tolerance, as well as have deep respect for all the world’s nationalities (Bunge,
1994: 4).
In a postmodern world system in which electronic media, migration and
travel have enabled the creation of an entirely sociocultural universe, terms such
as ‘centre’ and ‘periphery’ are no longer appropriate or of value (Appadurai, 1990;
Clifford, 1988, 2013). The title of the 1991 New York State Social Studies Review and
Development Committee’s report One World, Many Peoples: A declaration of cultural
interdependence (see Buell, 1993: 62) recognized the changed global paradigm that
underpins the concept of global history.

From theory to practice

The method
It is clear that an educational curriculum development and research methodology is
needed to create a new global history. The distinction between content and process
could be the framework for designing syllabuses and pedagogy that meet teachers’
needs to teach global history themes, topics and concepts. But in global history we
should teach a comprehensive history that all can share. How this might look in curricular
terms is challenging. Tackling curriculum development at an abstract level enables the
emergence of a coherent, interesting and challenging framework. In creating effective,
challenging and stimulating global history pedagogy, a primary task is to identify
developments that involved and affected humanity on a global scale over a long
period of time. It is crucial to encourage students to ask large, searching questions
about the human past, to compare patterns of continuity and change in different parts
of the world, and to examine the histories and achievements of particular peoples or
civilizations.
In addition, we need to promote students’ global thinking. So, we must ask:
What does global thinking mean? What processes help learning about it? And
finally, as already noted, what pedagogy is effective for teaching it? The emphasis on
pedagogy should be applied to the teaching of, for example, multiculturalism and the
environment. From this perspective, global history in an era of globalization could play
an important role in the development of a global consciousness, in accordance with
the synoptic scheme in Table 2 (Weil, 1990: 63; Nielsen, 2013).

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 159

Table 2: The relationship between global history and global consciousness

Global history

Nature Man Society

Global consciousness
Planetary ecology Self-ecology Social ecology
Environmentally responsible A moral economy that
behaviour as a form of self- moves beyond scarcity
interest and hierarchy towards a
world that re-harmonizes
human communities with
the natural world
Planetary consciousness Personal consciousness Social consciousness
The idea that human beings Awareness within and beyond Awareness of the
are members of a planetary oneself problems and injustices
society as much as they are that affect society
members of nations, cities,
villages

Here it is useful to mention Jerome Bruner’s MACOS (or Man: A Course of Study)
project in the United States in the 1970s, based on his ‘theory of instruction’. MACOS
was developed to teach children to understand what it means to be human, thus
rebutting ethnocentrism and racism through studying humans as a homogeneous
species to which we all belong (Conway, 2007: 60–1). Table 3 shows the way in which
history has previously been taught, and a proposed new approach.

Table 3: The previous paradigm and a new paradigm for teaching history

Previous paradigm New paradigm

Concept of history Information Formation
teaching
Education of the personality
Concept of student Student of history as teaching Student of history as teaching
of history ‘object’ ‘subject’
Field of historical History is personally irrelevant History is personally relevant
action
Acquisition of historical Transformation of the whole
knowledge personality
History is a problem-solving
discipline
Agents of history School as the only agent of Family, school and society in
education history education a concrete effort for history
education
Teacher as ‘instructor’
Teacher as animator/facilitator
Concept of Evolution terminates in Evolution continues to the adult
evolution adolescence
Type of formation Predominance of the historical General education precedes the
specialization historical specialization

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

160 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

Previous paradigm New paradigm

Orientation of Competition, power, Pragmatic and ethical values:
values possessiveness, celebrity in simplicity, cooperation,
history generosity, participation
equality, equanimity
Method of history Passive method: teacher teaches Active method: Teacher of history
teaching and student listens is an adviser
History is a descriptive subject, Student of history is an active
not concerned with explanation researcher and teaches others
History is a compendium of History involves both description
primordial and inalienable facts and explanation
History is easier than mathematics History is more difficult than
mathematics

From a methodological point of view, periodization of global history makes sense at a

relatively high level of generalization to make it comprehensible (NCHS, 1996). History
in a global era should include the history of ethnicities, cultures and civilizations from
around the world. Global history should selectivity draw upon exemplars from the
whole world to illuminate key themes, topics, and substantive and syntactic historical
concepts.
In more detail, first this could involve historians comparing records from the
past in order to describe the effects that geography and the environment have had
on societies, including the development of urban centres, food, clothing, industry,
agriculture, shelter, trade, education and other aspects of culture, as well as comparing
and contrasting various aspects of family life, erudition, structures and roles in different
cultures and in many eras with their own experience. The main ideas may be illustrated
in folk tales, legends, myths and stories of heroism that disclose the history and
traditions of various cultures around the world, and describe life in urban areas and
communities of various cultures of the world at various times in their history.
Second, historians would obtain historical data to describe significant aspects
of cultures of the world; to analyse their education, dance, music and arts; to draw
conclusions about daily life and beliefs; and to explain customs related to important
celebrations, traditions, rituals and ceremonies.

A thematic structure
As mentioned, some of the most important aspects of postmodernity are the redefinition
of the ‘borders’ between different cultures (Vieux, 1994) and the identification of the
criteria used in the process of justifying the policies and practices of Western society
(Slater, 1995). Postmodernism rejects modern historical discourse, according to which
history is treated as a chronologically defined and teleologically cognitive structure.
On the contrary, it supports a view of history that is decentralized, discontinuous,
fragmented and diverse (Giroux, 1990; Gregoriou, 2001).
In this context, how the past should be taught to students can be realized in
three ways. First, through teaching that focuses on developing students as citizens.
Second, through teaching that aims to explain human history and make it intelligible.
Third, through teaching of the notion of ‘otherness’ (Oakes and Lipton, 1999). This
orientation appears to be the key to enriching school history with elements suitable

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 161

for expanding the spiritual horizons of tomorrow’s citizens (McKellar, 1999; Burke, 1991;
Jenkins, 1997: 3).
In the framework of the new paradigm in education, a thematic structure can be
proposed in order to promote students’ political intelligence in our global age (see
Table 4). Obviously, this table (and also the other tables in this study) might be applied
differently in the curricula of different countries, since countries and jurisdictions are
multicultural and include varying and contrasting histories, cultures, faiths, ideologies,
customs, ceremonies, traditions, governance and lifestyles. The significance and
differences of the proposed themes arise from their unique sociocultural and historical
contexts (Sotshangane, 2002: 210–17).

Table 4: Concepts in global history that could be taught using a variety of teaching
approaches

References Themes Processes Goals/values Level of values

Nature Perception Historicity Knowledge Cognitive
Man Patterning Clarity
Society Abstraction Integrity
Globe Connections Understanding
Reference to
sources
Analysis
Nature Culture Cross-cultural/ Multicultural Affective
Man Multiple comparisons understanding
Society perspectives Altruism
Globe Responsibility Humanism
Harmony
Openness
Nature Justice Synthesis and Globalism Basic
Man Liberty systemic Ecology and
Society Prejudice thinking humanity
Globe Migrations
Interdependence
Violence
Peace
Wealth
Systems
Nature Objectivity Enquiry Social Transpersonal/
Man Bias Participation responsibility sociopolitical
Society Paradigms and national,
Globe Acceptance of supranational
uncertainty citizenship
Complexity
Choice

Teaching diversity, cross-cultural interaction, multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity in

global history could focus on the following concepts/themes:
t
Personality: Respect for individual identity, personality, self-esteem and
confidence leads to, and helps develop, positive concepts of self and others.
t
Cultural characteristics: These might include values, patterns, ideologies, beliefs,
traditions, customs, and behaviours that members of a group recognize, esteem
and share, and which differentiate them from other groups.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

162 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

t
The necessities of life: A fundamental need for all people.

t
Social structure: This includes institutions such as family, clan, tribe, schools,
religions, government and clubs.
t
Symbiosis: For example, the mutual dependence/reliance of individuals and
groups on one another for harmonious, cooperative existence.
t
Interaction: Individuals and groups transmit messages through language,
symbols, signs, behaviour, culture and education, and interact with each other.
t
Misappropriation: This may be in the form of bias, exploitation, discrimination or
stereotypes.
t
Pluralism: This is defined as a societal state where different ethnic, racial, religious
or social groups retain their identity while living and working harmoniously and
effectively in society at large (Weaver, 1988: 108).
However, a vision for building global consciousness via the teaching of global history,
as the Conference of the National Council for History Education in Miami (Manitoba
Education and Training, 1993) proposed, could include some of the following elements:
the concept of ‘nation’ in its global context; the revision of the curriculum and the
preparation of world standards in global history; the abandonment of ethnocentric
and Eurocentric mentality in historical research and history teaching; the critique of
the ideological and political use of history; and the importance of a new imagination
in history education.

Course patterns and syllabus

According to the ideas previously discussed, students who study global history should
consider the hypothetical end-state of globality (that is, when barriers have fallen) from
a universal perspective. Globality deals not with a particular history of a nation, but
with the history of the whole world (Hourdakis, 1996) – see also the timescale of ‘big
history’ (Christian, 2004: 79–105). In this area, a contemporary international bibliography
identifies numerous curriculum guides, projects and studies (Bentley, 1996: 756)..
Students should also discover ways in which they can gain additional knowledge
in learning global history without distorting or misinterpreting its cultural aspects.
Teachers could also discuss the use of ancient history as a means for students to
learn about democracy and social justice (Yurco, 1994: 36–7; Kahne and Westeimer,
2003: 34–40; Aldrete, 2011: 65–70). This would involve the revision of the pedagogy
for teaching about ancient civilizations, as in the response to teachers’ requests for
practical assistance in implementing a history–social science curriculum (Manitoba
Education and Training, 1993: 86; Seminole County Board of Public Instruction, 1986:
14ff., 21ff.).
Other concepts for a course on global history include education and culture;
education, responsibility and citizenship within the concept of political organization;
education and its relation to the economy, culture, technology and the labour market;
and the national and supranational/global aspect of education and culture. The
concept of man, in the context of nature and society would be interesting, as well as
the concept of social groups, including relations between majorities and minorities.

Pedagogy and new visions: Hopes, prospects,

developments
The basis for global history pedagogy is that in a postmodern era it must enable
the making of previously neglected but seminal global connections in their global

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 163

context. For example, a global history textbook must treat equally Western, non-
Western and Third World global identities. We must also reject the imperialistic focus,
register and imbalance implicit in many curricula and teaching resources, and call
for their replacement. The pedagogic emphasis must be on critical thinking, and the
prioritization of human dignity studied on a global scale to promote universal human
values. (Geyer and Bright, 1995: 1,037; Burns, 2006: 368).
Currently there are many ways to teach, study and learn world history. Western-
oriented historical and educational research has extensively investigated world-
historical themes and topics (Brooks, 1991: 65–81; Curtin, 1991: 81–9; Mazlish and
Buultjens, 1993; Mader, 2012: 1–15). Comparative studies of ancient, medieval and
modern empires (McNeill, 1986, 1992; Greaves et al., 1990; Stearns et al., 2007) place
the West in a global framework that involves the rise and fall of imperial powers and
conflict between civilizations. Westernized world history also addresses a catholic
range of histories, for example, of discovery, exploration, maritime empires, nomadic
peoples and forced or voluntary migration, genocide, urbanization, finance, industry,
trade, diasporas, travel and communication (Featherstone, 1990; Bentley, 1993; Chow,
1993; Goddard et al., 1994; Geyer and Bright, 1995: 1,039–40; Hausen, 1996; Judt and
Snyder, 2012). World history should now be concerned with the presentation of global
issues through describing, analysing and interpreting, and promoting the world’s
diverse cultures within a common conceptual framework.
Global history does not reject world history or the comparative histories of
civilizations, but it redefines the framework in which these paradigms are used (Geyer
and Bright, 1995: 1,059). With this aim, its task is to facilitate understanding of the
characteristics that naturally create a single global community (Geyer and Bright,
1995: 1,058–60; McCarthy, 2012: 73). As Schäfer (1993: n.p.) noted, ‘Global history is
the unwritten history of the twentieth century, and we have to find out how it can be
written’.

Conclusion
The main task of a new world history today – that is, global history – is to relate the world’s
past to the era of globalization, interconnectedness and dependence – the global
village. In this context, historians and teachers should try to represent a contemporary
world arising from a melange of interconnected histories, which recognizes and
respects diversity but accepts the need for a common response to global challenges
that are putting the human race and its planet at risk. This needs imagination. With
this aim, we need a school history that encourages human values, a history filled with
colourful characters, a history that does not make the past superficially attractive
or dispense false optimism for the future, a history that creates a greater interest in
studying the possibility of a new global reality, which enhances human values, and
values of brotherhood, sisterhood, peace, justice and equality (McCarthy, 2012).

Notes on the contributors

Anthony Hourdakis is a professor at the University of Crete, Greece. His research
interests include: history of education, didactics of history and critical pedagogy. He is
a DVP of Zhengzhou University, People’s Republic of China and Director of Xeniseum
(Educational Museum, University of Crete). He is the author of twelve books and about
eighty articles in several different languages.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

164 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

Pella Calogiannakis is a professor at the University of Crete, Greece. Her research

interests are related to methodological issues of comparative education and political
socialization. She is a DVP of Zhengzhou University, People’s Republic of China. She is
the author of 10 books and editor (or co-editor) of 12 handbooks; she has published
about ninety articles in several different languages.
Tien-Hui Chiang is a distinguished professor at Zhengzhou University, People’s
Republic of China. He is a member of the WCCES Constitutional Standing Committee;
DVP of the CSHETP, Pedagogical Department, University of Crete; a Fulbright senior
scholar; distinguished scholar of the Ministry of Education, Taiwan; and Ex-President
of the Taiwan Association for Sociology of Education. His specialities are sociology of
education and globalization/education policy.

References
Aldrete, G.S. (2011) The Great Courses: History of the ancient world: A global perspective. Course
guidebook. Online. www.fortbendisd.com/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=1
78567&dataid=105807&FileName=3850_HistoryAncientWorld.pdf (accessed 26 April 2017).
Apostolidou, E. (2017) ‘The “burden of history” and controversial issues’. Public History Weekly,
5 (12), 1–5. Online. www.researchgate.net/publication/315706503_‘To_‘Baros‘_tes_Istorias_kai_
ta_Synkrousiaka_Zetemata_sten_Ekpaideuse‘_PUBLIC_HISTORY_WEEKLY_in_Greek_English_
German (accessed 1 August 2018).
Appadurai, A. (1990) ‘Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy’. Public Culture,
2 (2), 1–24.
Barnes, J. (2015) ‘Defining world history vs global history’. H-World discussion, 31 March. Online.
https://networks.h-net.org/node/20292/discussions/66052/defining-world-history-vs-global-
history (accessed 26 April 2017).
Bentley, J.H. (1993) Old World Encounters: Cross-cultural contacts and exchanges in pre-modern
times. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bentley, J.H. (1996) ‘Cross-cultural interaction and periodization in world history’. American
Historical Review, 101 (3), 749–70.
Brooks, G.E. (1991) ‘An undergraduate world history curriculum for the twenty-first century’. Journal
of World History, 2 (1), 65–79.
Brown, P.R.L. (1987) ‘The world of late antiquity, AD 150–750’. In Veyne, P. (ed.) A History of Private
Life: Vol. 1: From Pagan Rome to Byzantium. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 239–311.
Buell, F. (1993) ‘World studies for a multicultural era’. Social Studies, 84 (2), 58–62.
Bunge, R. (1994) ‘Sociological confession’. In Brown, H. (ed.) Sociology of World History Standards:
Standards in world history: A sociological perspective. World-L-Forum on non-Eurocentric world
history, Multiple recipients of list WORLD-L.
Burke, P. (ed.) (1991) New Perspectives on Historical Writing. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Burns, R.M. (ed.) (2006) Historiography: Critical concepts in historical studies: Vol. 5: Politics.
London: Routledge.
Chow, R. (1993) Writing Diaspora: Tactics of intervention in contemporary cultural studies.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Christian, D. (2004) Maps of Time: An introduction to big history. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Clifford, J. (1988) The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth-century ethnography, literature, and art.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Clifford, J. (2013) Returns: Becoming indigenous in the twenty-first century. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Collingwood, R.G. (1946) The Idea of History. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Conway, T.R. (2007) ‘Jerome Bruner’. In Kincheloe, J.L. and Horn Jr., R.A. (eds) The Praeger
Handbook of Education and Psychology. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 57–62. Online.
https://epdf.tips/the-praeger-handbook-of-education-and-psychology-four-volumes.html
(accessed 1 August 2018).
Coulby, D. (1995) ‘Ethnocentricity, post modernity and European curricular systems’. European
Journal of Teacher Education, 18 (2–3), 143–53.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 Teaching history in a global age 165

Craig, A., Graham, W.A., Kagan, D., Ozment, S. and Turner, F.M. (1997) The Heritage of World
Civilizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Curtin, P.D. (1991) ‘Graduate teaching in world history’. Journal of World History, 2 (1), 81–9.
DfE (Department for Education) (2013) ‘Statutory guidance: National curriculum in England: History
programmes of study’. Online. www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-
england-history-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-history-programmes-of-
study (accessed 12 July 2018).
Engle, S.H. (1971) ‘Global history’. In Deighton, L.C. (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Education (Vol. 4).
New York: Macmillan, 438–42.
Farnen, R.F. (ed.) (1994) Nationalism, Ethnicity, and Identity: Cross national and comparative
perspectives. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Featherstone, M. (ed.) (1990) Global Culture: Nationalism, globalization and modernity. London:
SAGE Publications.
Friedman, J. (2007) ‘Globalization’. In Nugent, D. and Vincent, J. (eds) A Companion to the
Anthropology of Politics. Oxford: Blackwell, 179–97. Online. https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/
jaro2017/SAN106/um/A_Companion_to_the_ANTHROPOLOGY_of_POLITICS.pdf (accessed
2 August 2018).
Geyer, M. and Bright, C. (1995) ‘World history in a global age’. American Historical Review,
100 (4), 1034–60.
Gills, B.K. and Thompson, W.R. (eds) (2006) Globalization and Global History. London: Routledge.
Giroux, H.A. (1990) ‘The politics of postmodernism: Rethinking the boundaries of race and
ethnicity’. Journal of Urban and Cultural Studies, 1 (1), 5–38.
Goddard, V.A., Llobera, J.R. and Shore, C. (eds) (1994) The Anthropology of Europe: Identities and
boundaries in conflict. Oxford: Berg.
Greaves, R.L. et al. (1990) Civilizations of the World: The human adventure. New York:
Harper and Row.
Gregoriou, Z. (2001) ‘The in-betweeness of postcolonial pedagogy: Teachers as receptacles and
transistors of difference in Derrida’s Khora’. In Biesta, G.J.J. and Egéa-Kuehne, D. (eds) Derrida
and Education. London: Routledge, 1–27.
Hausen, E. (1996) Human History at the Crossroads: Where do we go from here? Westport, CT:
Bergin and Garvey.
Hourdakis, A. (1996) ‘A global dimension via the teaching of the “ancient world”: Theoretical
concepts and an empirical approach from Greek primary textbooks’. Mediterranean Journal of
Educational Studies, 1 (2), 157–82.
Ivrideli, M., Papadakis, N. and Fragkoulis, I. (2003) ‘European integration, multiculturalism and the
intended curriculum of primary education in Greece: Myths and realities’. In Ross, A. (ed.) A
Europe of Many Cultures. London: CiCe, 411–18.
Jenkins, K. (ed.) (1997) The Postmodern History Reader. London: Routledge.
Judt, T. and Snyder, T. (2012) Thinking the Twentieth Century. New York: Penguin Press.
Kahne, J. and Westheimer, J. (2003) ‘Teaching democracy: What schools need to do’. Phi Delta
Kappan, 85 (1), 34–66.
Kishlansky, M. et al. (1995) Societies and Cultures in World History. New York: HarperCollins.
Leont’ev, D.A. (1994) ‘The concept of personal sense through the ages’. Multidisciplinary Newsletter
for Activity Theory, 15/16), 9–13.
Mader J.N. (2012) ‘Creating critical thinking in world history surveys: Innovations with primary
sources, film, and the internet’. Middle Ground Journal, 4, 1–15. Online. http://resources.css.
edu/academics/his/middleground/articles/mader.pdf (accessed 26 April 2017).
Manitoba Education and Training (1993) Social Studies Grade 8 Curriculum Guide: Revised.
Winnipeg: Manitoba Education and Training.
Mazlish, B. (1998) ‘Comparing global history to world history’. Journal of Interdisciplinary History,
28 (3), 385–95.
Mazlish, B. (2006) The New Global History. New York: Routledge.
Mazlish, B. and Buultjens, R. (eds) (1993) Conceptualizing Global History. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Mazlish, B. and Iriye, A. (2005) The Global History Reader. New York: Routledge.
McCarthy, T.P. (ed.) (2012) ‘Interlude: Who controls the past controls the future: Interview with David
Barsamian, Boulder, Colorado, 1992’. In Zinn, H. The Indispensable Zinn: The essential writings of
the “people’s historian”. Ed. McCarthy, T.P. New York: New Press, 66–81.
McKellar, I. (1999) ‘Using sources in history teaching’. In Bennett S. (ed.) Interpreting the Past Using
Sources in History Teaching: EUROCLIO, Bulletin 11.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

 166 Hourdakis, Calogiannakis and Chiang

McNeill, W.H. (1986) Polyethnicity and National Unity in World History. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press.
McNeill, W.H. (1992) The Global Condition: Conquerors, catastrophes, and community. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Moniot, H. (1993) Didactique de l’histoire. Paris: Nathan.
NCHS (National Center for History in the Schools) (1995) ‘Basic principles’. Online. https://phi.
history.ucla.edu/nchs/standards-grades-k-4/developing-standards-grades-k-4/ (accessed
27 April 2017).
NCHS (National Center for History in the Schools) (1996) ‘Developing standards’ Online.
https://phi.history.ucla.edu/nchs/preface/developing-standards/ (accessed 1 August 2018).
Newman, F. and Holzman, L. (1993) Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary scientist. London: Routledge.
Nielsen, B. (2013) ‘L’Unesco et le culturellement correct’. Gradhiva, 18, 74–97. Online.
http://gradhiva.revues.org/2713 (accessed 12 July 2018).
Nietzsche, F. (1976) The Use and Abuse of History. Trans. Collins, A. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Oakes, J. and Lipton, M. (1999) Teaching to Change the World. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Peyrot, J. (1986) ‘Editorial: Grandeur et misère’. Historiens et geographes, 312, 334–8.
Peyrot, J. (1990) ‘Editorial: Programmes du secondaire: la nouvelle donne’. Historiens et
geographes, 327, 19–23.
Peyrot, J. (1999) L’enseignement de l’histoire en Europe. Paris: Hachette.
Pomeranz, K. (2002) ‘Beyond the East–West binary: Resituating development paths in the
eighteenth-century world’. Journal of Asian Studies, 61 (2), 539–90.
Reddy, W.M. (2001) The Navigation of Feeling: A framework for the history of emotions. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Robbins, K. (1993) History, Religion and Identity in Modern Britain. London: Hambledon Press.
Rosenwein, B.H. (2010) ‘Problems and methods in the history of emotions’. Passions in Context,
1 (1), 1–32. Online. www.passionsincontext.de/uploads/media/01_Rosenwein.pdf (accessed
16 August 2017).
Schäfer, W. (1993) ‘Global history: Historiographical feasibility and environmental reality’. In Mazlish,
B, and Buultjens, R. (eds) Conceptualizing Global History. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 47–69.
Scheer, M. (2012) ‘Are emotions a kind of practice (and is that what makes them have a history)? A
Bourdieuian approach to understanding emotion’. History and Theory, 51 (2), 193–220.
Seminole County Board of Public Instruction (1986) United States History Curriculum. Eighth Grade
Social Studies Curriculum. Online. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED335292.pdf (accessed
1 August 2018).
Singer, A.J. (2011) Teaching Global History: A social studies approach. New York: Routledge.
Slater, J. (1995) Teaching History in the New Europe. London: Cassell.
Sotshangane, N. (2002) ‘What impact globalization has on cultural diversity?’. Alternatives: Turkish
Journal of International Relations, 1 (4), 214–31.
Stearns, P.N., Adas, M. and Schwartz, S.B. (2007) World Civilizations: The global experience. 6th ed.
Boston: Longman.
Stradling, R. (2003) Multiperspectivity in History Teaching: A guide for teachers. Strasbourg: Council
of Europe.
Tait, P. (2015) ‘The trouble with choosing what history to teach’. The Telegraph, 7 October. Online.
www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/11915034/The-trouble-with-choosing-what-
history-to-teach.html (accessed 16 August 2017).
Turk, D.B., Dull, L.J., Cohen, R. and Stoll, M.R. (2014) Teaching Recent Global History: Dialogues
among historians, social studies teachers, and students. New York: Routledge.
Vieux, S. (1994) ‘In the shadow of neo-liberal racism’. Race and Class, 36 (1), 23–32.
Weaver, V.P. (1988) ‘Education that is multicultural and global: An imperative for economic and
political survival’. Social Studies, 79 (3), 107–9.
Weil, P. (1990) L’Art de Vivre en Paix. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization.
Wertsch, J.V., del Río, P. and Alvarez, A. (eds) (1995) Sociocultural Studies of Mind. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wolf, E.R. (1982) Europe and the People without History. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Yurco, F.J. (1994) ‘How to teach ancient history: A multicultural model’. American Educator,
18 (1), 32–7.

History Education Research Journal 15 (2) 2018

View publication stats