

Globalization, in all its faces and waves, marks the epoch of contemporary capitalism. Why and in what ways is globalization a pivotal concept for the analysis of GCE? Carlos Alberto Torres: 113) suggests: “ever before has the devastation caused by the pursuit of profit, as defined by capitalism, been more extensive than it is today.

We also implied that under the conditions of globalization and the pressure of neoliberal political values, democracy is very often defined as the right to cache material goods and the right to the dissolute pursuit of profit. In our recent publication (Bosio and Torres 2019), we defined globalization as a complex and multilayered phenomenon that has an impact on individual lifestyles, communities, and democratic engagement in society, and eventually on educational institutions, particularly schools and universities.

Conscientization in Freirean terms refers to achieving an in-depth understanding of the world, allowing for the perception and exposure of social and political contradictions-and for identity development through a dialectic of local and global (Torres 2019)-which also entails transmitting to our learners such immaterial values as a strong spirit of solidarity and treasuring humanity, coupled with an understanding that our planet is our home. In this article-dialogue, we discuss GCE as more than service delivery-we view it as a means of “conscientization”. First, GCE supports global peace second, it encourages interventions regarding economic, social, and cultural inequality and can reduce global poverty third, it provides a solid framework and guidelines for the support of civic virtues that will result in more democratic societies. Torres ( 2017b) sets a minimum of 3 justifications for including GCE in a modern educational institution. GCE is intended to work at the crossroads of programs, education, and globalization for the preparation of young people (Bosio 2020), who will be living in an increasingly interdependent environment (Yemini, Tibbitts, and Goren 2019). Researchers, educators, and even politicians have been contributing to the description, interpretation, and development of GCE, creating a highly diverse conceptual arena (Bosio, Ibe, Matsui, and Rothman 2018 Yemini, Goren, and Maxwell 2018 Bosio and Schattle 2017). The many publications and the growing debate about Global Citizenship Education (GCE) over the past 10 years demonstrates that this notion is becoming increasingly relevant for contemporary educational institutions (Bosio 2019 Bosio and Gaudelli 2018 Bosio and Torres 2018 Yemini 2016). This parallel rests on our assumption that GCE should be about learners’ emancipation toward critical consciousness. The article concludes by attempting to draw a parallel between the “mission” of GCE in contemporary educational institutions and Paulo Freire’s notion of critical consciousness. The third section delineates the relationship between GCE, “global-peace”, global commons, and common good. Given the need for a theory to articulate the concept of global citizenship, the second section frames GCE as an intervention in search of a theory. The first section considers the phenomena of globalization and the proposal of the Global Education First Initiative (GEFI), which United Nations (UN) Secretary Ban Ki-moon launched in 2012, of furthering global citizenship-a pivotal motive of the UN agenda. As it attempts to address the current criticism of global citizenship, this dialogue not only challenges frequent misinterpretations of GCE-a concept that neoliberals have often adopted to convey global market competence or even employment that implicates frequent international flights-but also embraces contemporary educational issues and discuss what it means to educate for critical global citizenry, in this increasingly multicultural world. The following is an ongoing dialogue on global citizenship education (GCE) in relation to research, teaching, and learning in the modern educational institutions that the authors of this article have been having since 2017.
