Envisioning Global Education in Rwanda: Contributions from Secondary School Teachers

Abstract

Global education (GE) has become important in education due to heightened global interconnectedness and interdependence, with its incorporation into school materials aimed at preparing learners to navigate global challenges. In implementing GE, teachers are considered critical agents to transform normative GE into knowledge in classrooms. This study examines Rwandese teachers’ knowledge, awareness, and perceptions of challenges they face in implementing GE in schools. In a quantitative design, 208 teachers from 15 participating secondary schools completed a survey. The study findings reveal that the teachers had moderate to high levels of knowledge and awareness of global education, with most of the teachers recognising GE to be important in preparing learners for the future and stated the need to incorporate it within the curriculum in Rwanda. This study underscores the need for teacher training and professional development to enhance GE integration, and the provision of necessary resources and materials to enable the implementation of GE in schools in Rwanda.

1. Introduction

In the twenty-first century, globalization has intensified and become a key driver of the rapid and multifaceted transformations that affect various domains of our contemporary society such as social, political, environmental, and economic aspects (Moloi et al., 2009). Due to globalization, cultural interactions have increased and diversity has become more salient (Inka & Niina, 2013), and no country is immune to this. Consequently, the world is confronted with complex challenges such as pandemics, social justice issues, climate change, extreme poverty, and inequality that require urgent and collective attention. These challenges demand that educators and schools take action to equip learners with competencies and dispositions to understand and navigate global challenges and to actively contribute to creating a better world (UNESCO, 2015).

Frameworks such as Global Education (GE) have been recommended for inclusion into the curriculum by organizations to provide opportunities for learners to develop awareness of global interconnectedness, diversities, and shared challenges (Wolansky, 2016). Global Education Network Europe (GENE) has been contributing to further the debate and reach of GE across the globe for the past three decades. It provides the most up-to-date, encompassing, and internationally agreed upon definition of GE, defining GE as education “that enables people to reflect critically on the world and their place in it; to open their eyes, hearts and minds to the reality of the world at local and global level. It empowers people to understand, imagine, hope and act to bring about a world of social and climate justice, peace, solidarity, equity and equality, planetary sustainability, and international understanding. It involves respect for human rights and diversity, inclusion, and a decent life for all, now and into the future. Global Education encompasses a broad range of educational provision: formal, non-formal and informal; life-long and life-wide. We consider it essential to the transformative power of, and the transformation of, education” (GENE, 2022, p. 3).

Despite the growing importance of GE, it remains a highly contested and ambiguous concept, as it encompasses diverse perspectives and ideological positions on its meaning, purpose, and application in different contexts (Pashby et al., 2020; Bourn, 2020). GE is mostly used as an umbrella term for various educational initiatives that have an “international” dimension (Gadsby & Bullivant, 2011) and is often used synonymously with related terms such as global citizenship education, global learning, planetary education, and development education (Reynolds, 2015). In spite of these, GE is considered a valuable approach that can be integrated into the curriculum to support learners to understand the nexus between what they learn and the real world (Reimers, 2020), and to enable them to relate and act to overcome global challenges (UNESCO, 2025).

The literature suggests that teachers are critical actors in implementing GE in schools, and their knowledge, awareness, and perceptions of GE are crucial. Comprehensive research about teachers’ GE conceptualizations in secondary schools has suggested a diversity of understandings, as well as the importance of placing GE interpretations in the broader linguistic, educational, and cultural context (e.g., Duarte & Robinson-Jones, 2022). How teachers impact GE implementation in classrooms (Goren & Yemini, 2015) is of particular interest. Research has suggested that teachers play a decisive role in facilitating learners’ development of a global perspective and understanding of global issues (Kirkwood-Tucker 1990, in Bourn, 2016, p. 66). At the same time, teachers’ limitations in addressing GE concepts—a reflection of the limitations of education systems, more broadly—have been found to impact its quality and transformative potential (e.g., Shar, 2024; Tsegay & Bekoe, 2020), particularly in contexts where such approaches have been less established. Hence, it is important that teachers are culturally and pedagogically competent to create a transformative learning environment for their students (Goren & Yemini, 2015). GE implementation in schools requires teachers to address sensitive and controversial issues such as social justice, the violation of human rights, and global inequalities (Andreotti & de Souza, 2008). Not only does this require thematic knowledge, but also an understanding of the interplay between individual and collective solutions, of how these issues unfold both at the local and global levels (Altun, 2017). These solutions require knowledge and understanding of issues that transcend national borders, cultures, and languages (Capalbo, 2013). This underscores the intricate need for a global approach to education (Global Education in this case) to prepare learners for the current and future global complexities.

In Rwanda, despite a curricular reform in 2016¹ that brought into implementation the Competence-Based Curriculum (CBC) (Bosire, 2022) that seems to include several common topics of GE through the cross-cutting issues implemented across all levels of education, to date, no systematic evidence on how these contribute to promoting GE or the situation of GE has been established. These cross-cutting issues including environment and sustainability; genocide studies; financial education; peace and values education; gender; standardization culture; inclusive education; and comprehensive sexuality education (REB, 2015); resonating with the principles of GE by fostering critical thinking and a sense of global citizenship. By weaving these cross-cutting issues into the CBC, Rwanda aims to spur a global approach to teaching and learning, and for learners to acquire knowledge, skills, and values that seem aligned with, for instance, the ones expected to promote responsible global citizens (REB, 2015; UNESCO, 2015).

This article presents findings from a broader study on the inclusion and implementation of GE in Rwandan secondary schools, conducted in Kicukiro district, Kigali, Rwanda from January to September 2022. This article focuses on teachers’ perspectives around GE, addressing the following questions:

What is the level of knowledge and awareness of GE among secondary school teachers on Kicukiro district, Rwanda?

What are the teachers’ perceptions toward the inclusion of GE in teaching and learning in their schools?

What are the challenges teachers face when incorporating global education and perspectives into their teaching?

The subsequent section provides a theoretical background delving into GE and the role of teachers. Following that, this article explores the context of GE in Rwanda. The Section 3 outlines the research design, data collection process, and instruments. Moving forward, the results are presented and discussed in the Section 4, further drawing implications in connection to the existing literature. Finally, the Section 5 presents the final remarks.

1.1. Global Education: An Educational Approach Still to Be “Global”

The need for a form of international education that encourages mutual learning around the world was amplified by the end of the Second World War and the creation of international organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1945. The idea of education that encompasses international issues by UNESCO was first captured in Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the international community in 1948 (Shea, 2013), with a focus on promoting justice, equity, and dignity for all humans. The declaration states that:

“Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and strengthening, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Furthermore, it shall promote understanding, tolerance, and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.”²

This definition by the UN emphasizes the multifaceted and critical role of education encompassing the holistic development of individuals, the advancement of human rights, and the cultivation of international understanding and tolerance, and active support for the United Nations’ endeavors in international peacekeeping.

Global Education emerged as an educational approach aiming to promote a more global outlook around world issues (Bourn, 2016). Since its creation around the 1960s, it has evolved significantly from a focus on knowing about world issues to a perspective of a greater understanding of global challenges, how they interrelate and impact the local and global levels, and the envisioning of possible ways of addressing them (Coelho et al., 2022). Broadly, GE is conceptualized as a way to create knowledge and awareness, aimed at providing training for responsible citizenship under a perspective of lifelong development (Morris 1977, cited in Altun, 2017). In conducting our study in Rwanda, we adopted the GE definition previously stated by the Global Education Network Europe (GENE).

GE is intricately intertwined and influenced by the historical, cultural, political, and economic contexts, dimensions, and perspectives of different actors and stakeholders involved (Coelho et al., 2020). Moreover, GE’s definition and meaning to different people in different parts of the world has been a subject of debate among educators, policymakers, and scholars (Reynolds, 2015). GE is understood differently within and across contexts due to its abstract nature and historical contexts (Oxley & Morris, 2013, p. 302). In fact, the scrutiny and criticism around GE extends beyond just its definitional aspects to include inquiries on its scope, curriculum content, and pedagogical approaches used for its integration into educational teaching and learning experiences. Some scholars advocate for a more focused and issue-based GE that disentangles issues such as climate change and human rights (Andreotti & de Souza, 2012). Conversely, other scholars advocate for a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach to GE, with a curriculum that covers a wide range of topics and issues relevant to the global context (Laurie et al., 2016). The rationale for this approach lies in the recognition that the global landscape is multifaceted with highly interconnected issues spanning across cultural, economic, environmental, political, and social domains.

GE has been defined in various ways. Robert Hanvey in 1976 provided a classical definition of GE in relation to a global perspective as a blend of various skills, knowledge, and competences, stating that individuals may possess some and lack others. Hanvey identified five dimensions of GE: (1) Perspective consciousness, meaning the awareness that one has a view of the world that is not universally shared and others have their own views that are different from one’s own; (2) State of the planet awareness, meaning the awareness of prevailing world conditions and trends; (3) Cross-cultural awareness, related to the awareness of the diversity of ideas and practices around the world; (4) Knowledge of global dynamics, comprising an understanding of key traits and mechanisms of the world system and consciousness of global change; and (5) Awareness of human choices, which is defined as the understanding of problems of the choices people and nations have to make, as their knowledge of global system expands (Hanvey, 1982).

On the other hand, (Merryfield 1997, cited in Altun, 2017) defined GE as an interdisciplinary research and academic field that focuses on issues cutting across cultural, economic, environmental, political, and social interdependence. According to Merryfield, the goals of global education should be: (1) To create awareness of global content, problems, and topics; (2) Increase cross-cultural interactions and understanding among people; (3) Create the ability for people to make their own choices and decide for themselves; (4) Create awareness for global and local ties and the need to fight for human rights; and (5) Provide skills for civic participation and involvement (Altun, 2017). Thus, GE is generally viewed to enhance knowledge and awareness and to provide training for responsible citizenship for lifelong development (Morris 1977, cited in Altun, 2017), and as a pedagogical concept to address today’s realities by facilitating the development of knowledge and skills required to create a secure, just, and sustainable world (Cabezudo et al., 2019). Other conceptualizations of GE posit that a critical GE should incorporate historical factors to help learners understand unequal global relationships, deal with issues beyond the nation-state, and enhance their reflective ethical perspectives. This critical GE perspective calls for a curriculum that fosters critical dialogue and action on global issues (Subedi, 2010).

In many cases and for applicability purposes, GE has been adapted to fit specific contexts. For example, in Europe, a key milestone of GE is usually marked around the Europe-wide Global Education Congress in 2002, which represented an important political statement on the implementation of GE across European countries. The aim of the Maastricht Declaration, then published, presented GE as an important awareness “tool” about the realities of the world, particularly those of the Millennium Development Goals (2000–2015). Twenty years on from the Maastricht Declaration, the Global Education Network Europe (GENE)³ expanded this definition, in the recently published European Declaration on Global Education, known as the “Dublin Declaration”, mentioned earlier. With a long-term vision that encompasses broader and deeper political support for the period up to 2050 (GENE, 2022), GE was defined as:

“Education that enables people to reflect critically on the world and their place in it, to open their eyes, hearts, and minds to the reality of the world at local and global levels. It further empowers people to understand, imagine, hope and act to bring about a world of social and climate justice, peace, solidarity, equity and equality, planetary sustainability, and international understanding and involves respect for human rights and diversity, inclusion, and a decent life for all, now and in the future” (GENE, 2022, p. 2). This definition expands the understanding of GE’s direction by accommodating a range of potentially mutually permeable education approaches, early definitions like those of Hanvey and Merryfield, and more recently that of the UNESCO (2015) using the equivalent terminology of GCE. Hence, this definition provides a valid conceptual “model” to help unpack GE dimensions, justifying the conceptual choices and terms informing the current study.

The current definition is also aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals and informs several GE policies in Europe. Despite its clear European background, GENE is progressing towards expanding the reach of this Declaration and its initiatives to mirror other realities. The GE conceptualization by GENE captures a wide range of topics, thus allowing for multiple ways to approach, interpret, and implement it. Moreover, this conceptualization acknowledges the importance of both local and global levels and actors, notably, teachers, in addressing the realities of the world.

While several countries in the Global North (such as the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States of America, Portugal, Canada, and Italy) are taking prominence in incorporating GE in curricula and in teacher education and in conducting research on GE in school settings, the adoption of GE in the Global South countries has happened at a slower pace. Research evidence suggests enormous disparities across the globe in the adoption of GE in formal and non-formal education. Having started as a Northern agenda, most research available on the adoption of GE in schools comes from western, particularly, European backgrounds, and African countries are much less represented (see e.g., ANGEL, 2022). Strengthening research in African countries is important, considering growing claims around the potential relevance of GE for such contexts, despite the notable differences across them (Lauwerier, 2020; Tsegay & Bekoe, 2020). In addition to the evident current knowledge gap in GE, it is also vital to overcome mostly Western narratives and contribute to a more “global” understanding of this education, also opening the possibility of exploring the emerging connection between GE and African traditions, for instance, Ubuntu (Waghid, 2021).

Research on GE and GCE on sub-Saharan Africa contexts suggests great variations between educational policy and actual practice in schools and classrooms. Tsegay and Bekoe (2020), in a study on how GCE and teacher education in Africa relate to educational policies, content, and pedagogical practices, found that in countries such as Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Liberia, and Rwanda, the inclusion of GCE in education systems was vague, and was mainly associated with the civic and national perspectives in those countries (p. 155). In Liberia, Quaynor (2015) found that teachers and students predominantly associated citizenship and citizenship education with the nation-state, and there was little connection if any to global issues and contexts. These findings highlight the necessity for increased investment by government and other educational stakeholders to integrate GE and concepts like GCE in schools to broaden learners’ perspectives. Furthermore, the need to examine the promotion and teaching of GE in schools has been amplified by Lauwerier’s (2020) findings in research conducted in Senegal. This study unveiled significant disparities between the envisaged curriculum, which outlines the anticipated learning outcomes for students in schools, and the practical classroom practices. For instance, even though the Ministry of education had integrated international discourse into educational policy documents, their practical implementation in classrooms was still lacking.

1.2. Global Education and the Rwandan Context

The 1994 genocide significantly impacted socioeconomic structures in Rwanda. However, in post-genocide time, the government of Rwanda has made remarkable progress in education, striving to enhance access to education, using education as a tool to foster peace and national unity, and creating a new civic national identity among Rwandans (Taka, 2020). One crucial aspect of this effort has been through curriculum reform and the National Curriculum for Basic Education of 2015 (CBC), which emphasizes knowledge, skills, and values related to human rights, democracy, peace, and environmental issues (REB, 2015). Furthermore, the Rwandan government’s efforts to promote GE in Rwandan schools can be seen through the cross-cutting issues in the CBC curriculum, which are taught in different subjects and grade levels (Bosire, 2022). For example, citizenship education in Rwanda aims to furnish students with the requisite knowledge and skills essential to become responsible and engaged global citizens. Genocide studies delve into the historical contexts leading up to the genocide in Rwanda and other parts of the world. These educational aspects foster the development of critical thinking among learners, making them thoughtfully engage with pressing global issues (Russell, 2018). However, to date, no specific official strategic and specific documents or policies for Global Education and its equivalent terminology (global citizenship education) and related fields (education for sustainable development) have been found regarding Rwanda. This is also demonstrated by the most comprehensive country stock exercise found to date on this regard (UNESCO, 2019). Aspects analysed included the presence of the following topics across curricula plans and textbooks: “1. Learning related to cultural diversity and tolerance”, “2. Learning related to peace and non-violence”, “3. Learning related to human rights and gender equality”, “4. Learning related to environmental sustainability”, “5. Learning related to sustainable consumption and production”, and “6. Learning related to human survival and well-being” (UNESCO, 2019, pp. 34–35). The most common among these topics are “Cultural Diversity and Tolerance”, “Peace and Non-Violence”, and “Human Rights and Gender Equality”, which accounted for 62% of the references, followed by “Environmental Sustainability” and “Sustainable Production and Consumption”, with 28% of the references (UNESCO, 2019, p. 24). The report also analysed how these topics are addressed from a learning standpoint, considering three learning dimensions: cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral. It concluded by a predominance of the cognitive dimension in Rwandan curriculum, particularly in lower and upper secondary schools, where it accounted for between 45% and 49% of the learning (UNESCO, 2019).

Additionally, the government of Rwanda has implemented various state-sponsored GE-related programs for civic education to cultivate a sense of national unity and cultural values among Rwandan citizens of all ages (Russell, 2018). For instance, the Itorero⁴ National Service Training, reintroduced in 2009, offers civic education to high school students and school leavers, emphasizing the importance of the Rwandan state, nationhood, patriotism, and the importance of national unity (Nzahabwanayo, 2018). Additionally, programs such as Igando⁵ solidarity camps aim to foster national unity and reconciliation (Purdeková, 2015), urugerero⁶ is meant for high school students, and ndi umunyarwanda⁷ established in 2012 fosters discussions about ethnicity and national unity and encourages the Hutu to apologize to the Tutsi (Joselow 2014, cited in Russell, 2018). Programs, such as Urugerero and Ndi umunyarwanda, focus on promoting unity and reconciliation. These initiatives embody a culture of tolerance, which is a core component of GE (UNESCO, 2018). Furthermore, through these programs’ emphasis on national unity and reconciliation, they promote the need for building a more just and peaceful global society. Several non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also contribute to the promotion of GE-related concepts in Rwanda through programs that cultivate values and competencies that reflect a global mindset. For example, Global Youth Connect’s program, Turikumwe⁸, organizes a two-week workshop in Kigali, Rwanda, bringing together young leaders from all around the world and training them on human rights and peacebuilding at both the national and international levels (Global Youth Connect, 2020). Never Again Rwanda, established in response to the 1994 genocide, advocates for peace-building and social justice within Rwanda and the Great Lakes region (Never Again Rwanda, 2022). Moreover, the British Council’s Connecting Classrooms program fosters global citizenship and international understanding among participants in Rwanda (British Council, 2022). These efforts by the government and non-governmental organizations played a crucial role in the reconstruction of Rwanda’s social fabric following the genocide. The implementation of these initiatives and educational programs also plays an important role in fostering unity, reconciliation, and healing within the country by addressing historical and social divisions that had contributed to the conflict (Taka, 2020). In addition, schools contributed to reconciliation and peacebuilding through their facilitation of dialogues and initiatives aimed at promoting mutual comprehension across different groups and encouraged students to participate in similar activities (Taka, 2020). More recently, in 2024, the Rwanda Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) and Rwandan Education Board (REB), jointly with the Tony Blair Institute, promoted “Generation Global”, a global citizenship education program “aimed to equip young Rwandan students with the knowledge of global issues, life skills, and attitudes of open-mindedness to thrive in an interconnected world. Aligned with Rwanda’s competence-based curriculum framework, the program addresses four crucial areas—ICT and digital competencies, Citizenship and National Identity, and Communication and Critical thinking” (Generation Global, 2024, italics as original). Despite targeting students, the program also delivered teachers training for addressing these issues.

Given the aforementioned initiatives by the Rwandan government, the presence of some GE-related concepts in the CBC curriculum (Bosire, 2022), and the extant literature on the post-genocide educational landscape in Rwanda and the recent curriculum reforms (Russell, 2018), a pertinent question is the extent to which the CBC curriculum integrates and promotes GE within Rwandan secondary schools, and the extent to which teachers perceive the synergy between the CBC and GE and their role in translating this alignment and practically promoting GE in their educational settings. Overall, while no specific policy on GE has been identified, current evidence suggests its growing relevance in the education system. However, it has received little attention in research, which motivated the present study.

1.3. Teachers’ Role in Global Education Implementation

Teachers are critical actors in implementing GE in schools and facilitating learners to acquire knowledge, skills, and values for global citizenship, as curriculum delivery in schools depends largely on them (Davies, 2008). Therefore, it is necessary for teachers to be conscious of their role as global citizens (Fischman & Estellés, 2020), and their knowledge and awareness of GE are crucial in determining how they integrate GE into the curriculum and in classrooms. Additionally, other factors besides knowledge and awareness have been found to influence the implementation of GE in schools. Van Werven et al. (2023) state that there is a gap between policy rhetoric and actual practice of GE in many contexts as a result of curriculum overload, lack of resources, and insufficient teacher training and support. Similarly, teachers’ personal backgrounds, experiences, professional development opportunities, previous exposure to global issues, and levels of education can influence their knowledge and awareness of GE (Fischman & Estellés, 2020; Myers & Rivero, 2019).

Schweisfurth (2006) conducted a qualitative study on the incorporation of GCE into the curriculum in two secondary schools in Canada. The findings revealed that teachers exhibited varying levels of knowledge and awareness of GCE, which were influenced by factors such as their personal and professional backgrounds, exposure to GCE-related training and resources, and the level of school culture and support to teach GCE in their classrooms. Other challenges included curriculum demands and focus, and assessment pressures. Rapoport (2010) examined how secondary school teachers in Indiana, United States of America, conceptualized global citizenship, and what pedagogies and resources they used to include GCE in their teaching. Through in-depth interviews with a sample of six teachers, it was observed that teachers held positive attitudes towards GCE. However, they expressed a lack of confidence in integrating GCE into their classroom practices. This lack of confidence stemmed from their perceived insufficient knowledge, methodological content, and resources necessary for incorporating and teaching GCE in schools (Rapoport, 2010).

Roiha and Sommier (2021) examined the perceptions and practices of intercultural education among teachers in an international school in the Netherlands and found that the teachers recognised the significance of intercultural education, a concept related to GE, in equipping students with the necessary knowledge and skills for the future. However, there was a variation in teachers’ level of knowledge, awareness, and skills to teach intercultural education. As a result, Roiha and Sommier (2021) argued that it is important to improve teacher education to provide teachers with essential skills to teach intercultural education. Similarly, Bourn (2018) notes that even though educational background can influence teachers’ knowledge and awareness of GE, other factors such as teachers’ access to teaching resources and materials, their school and government policies, and their own beliefs and attitudes about GE can also significantly affect their willingness and ability to incorporate GE into their teaching. Despite the current examples, researching teachers’ perspectives and views on the concepts they implement in their classrooms remains a key research priority (Willemse et al., 2015).

Limited research exists on the case of GE in Rwanda, particularly regarding teachers. A recent analysis by Niyibizi et al. (2023) on GE in initial teacher education and school curricula highlights the need for greater investment in this area. This is especially important given the tensions within the competence-based curriculum between addressing national needs (particularly the promotion of national identity) and incorporating broader global perspectives.

While attempting to integrate GE into the curriculum and teaching in schools, teachers face enormous challenges and obstacles. According to Albright (2019), inadequate availability of GE resources and limited support from educational and governmental bodies was a hinderance. Furthermore, a study by la Velle (2020) found that the lack of adequate teaching materials, continuous in-service training and professional development, and insufficient knowledge and awareness of concepts eroded teachers’ confidence to teach GE in their classes. These challenges were further exacerbated when teachers lacked the requisite pedagogical skills, strategies, and global competence to integrate GE into their subject areas or even across the general curriculum being implemented (Kerkhoff & Cloud, 2020; Parmigiani et al., 2022). In light of these challenges, scholars suggest the need for extensive and better in-service training and mentoring, support from schools and educational authorities to help teachers enhance their knowledge of GE, pedagogical skills, and intercultural competence to integrate and implement GE in schools (Bakar et al., 2021; Lauwerier, 2020; Saperstein, 2020; Schweisfurth, 2006; Shar, 2024).

2. Materials and Methods

This article draws on empirical data from a larger study that examined the integration and implementation of GE in secondary schools in Kicukiro district, Rwanda (Bosire, 2022). To the best of our knowledge, the research conducted represents the most comprehensive piece of work on the Rwandan case for Global Education. The main study employed a mixed methods approach and used document analysis, interviews, and a cross-sectional survey. For this article, data were collected through a closed-ended questionnaire (Creswell, 2014), which involved 208 teachers from 15 sampled secondary schools. The survey aimed to explore teachers’ views, knowledge, and awareness of GE, and their perceptions of GE inclusion in school curricula in Kicukiro district, Rwanda. Kicukiro district was chosen for the study because of its better educational performance in terms of enrolment levels and literacy levels compared to the other two districts (Gasabo and Nyarugenge) in Kigali province (Ministry of Education-Rwanda, 2019). Additionally, the study focused on Kigali province due to the presence of diverse types of secondary schools (public, private, and government-subsidised) and for accessibility and logistical purposes.

The study used proportional stratified random sampling based on the administrative sectors (Imirenge)⁹ and school categories¹⁰ (Parsons, 2014) to select 15 secondary schools out of 37 schools in Kicukiro district. The schools were first grouped by sectors and then by categories. The Excel RANDOMIZATION function was used to assign a random number between 0 and 1 to each school. The schools were then sorted by the administrative sectors and by the random numbers in ascending order. Following the study’s sampling frame, schools from each sector were selected to ensure representation of all school categories (private, public, and government-subsidised schools). For the teachers, convenience sampling was applied and all teachers who were available during the school visits and were willing to participate in the survey were included. A total of 208 teachers participated in the study and provided insights through the teacher questionnaire.

Data collection occurred between January and March 2022. The data from the teachers were analysed descriptively using the Jeffrey’s Amazing Statistics Program (JASP version 0.17.2.1). The results are presented in tables focusing on the means and standard deviations of each construct and questions measured.

3. Results

3.1. Participant Profiles

Among the 15 secondary schools that participated in the study, 47% were public schools, 33% were government-subsidised schools, and only 20% were privately owned secondary schools (Figure 1). The inclusion of different school types aimed to ensure a representative sample. Since Rwandan schools consist of public, private, and faith-based institutions, this approach allowed for a broader range of teacher perspectives and helped examine whether views on GE varied by school type.

Among the 208 teachers who participated in the teacher survey, the majority were male (n = 120, 57.6%), while the rest were female teachers (n = 88, 42.3%). Most of the teachers had a bachelor’s degree as their highest educational qualification (n = 172, 82.7%), followed by diploma holders (n = 21, 10.1%) and master’s degree holders (n = 15, 7.2%). The teachers’ teaching experience varied from one to over thirty-one years, with the largest group being those with six to fifteen years of teaching experience (Table 1).

3.2. Teacher Knowledge and Awareness of Global Education and Global Issues

Global education encompasses a broad range of topics, requiring teachers to have the knowledge and awareness necessary to equip learners to become responsible and engaged global citizens. Table 2 presents the results of teachers’ knowledge and awareness of 14 global issues or topics (on a four-point scale) that were of interest to this study. Topics were selected based on the prior analysis of Rwandan curricula and school textbooks, as well as interviews with education stakeholders (Bosire, 2022).

On average, the teachers rated their perceived knowledge and awareness of the 14 global issues between =2.572 (global citizenship) and =3.163 (migration), and an overall average rating of =3.054. These mean values, that were above the average mean value, suggest that the teachers were knowledgeable and aware of the global issues that were presented before them. Additionally, the modal scores of all the 14 global issues were 3. Based on the four-point scale used, this suggests that the teachers were familiar with these global issues and that they could provide a general explanation about them. The standard deviation of the 14 global issues ranges between 0.620 and 0.795, showing little variation in the teacher responses around the mean, hence the responses were consistent. However, three global issues seemed problematic for the teachers and had mean scores below 3: sustainable lifestyles, global citizenship, and human rights issues, with mean scores of =2.91, =2.57, and =2.91, respectively. Additionally, their standard deviations were equally large (sustainable lifestyles = 0.737, global citizenship = 0.795, and human rights issues = 0.685). This suggests a greater variability in how the teachers rated their knowledge and awareness of these global issues, with some indicating they were less knowledgeable and aware of these three issues. Conversely, teachers’ responses indicate a higher level of acquaintance with global issues such as migration, causes of poverty in the world, and the promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, as they had the highest mean scores in that order.

3.3. Importance and Inclusion of GE in the Curriculum

The importance of GE in schools and the need to include it in the curriculum and teaching was assessed by a construct with five items, using a 5-point Likert Scale. Table 3 shows that items one and two measured the importance of GE and had mean scores of =4.35 and =4.06, respectively, indicating that teachers had a high regard and perception for GE and its role in preparing learners for the global society. Moreover, a larger percentage of teachers agreed or strongly agreed with items one and two (95.7% and 86% representation, respectively), indicating that they strongly recognize the importance and impact GE can have in schools and on learners.

In addition, teachers’ perceptions of the need to include GE in the curriculum and instruction were examined using three items, as shown in Table 3. The three items had mean scores ranging from 3.25 to 4.45, suggesting that, on average, teachers recognize the need for GE in the curriculum. However, teachers were ambivalent on whether education in Rwanda should focus on global issues rather than the development of national identity ($\overline{x}$ = 3.25). This is consistent with findings from Niyibizi et al.’s (2023) study on GE in initial teacher training and curricula, where a similar tension between “the national” and “the global” was identified, highlighting the need for expanded training in this field. Overall, these findings suggest that the teachers in Kicukiro district, Rwanda are aware of the significance of GE and the imperative to incorporate it into the educational curriculum and pedagogical practices.

3.4. Challenges to Teaching Global Issues

Teachers appeared to encounter significant challenges in incorporating GE in schools and classrooms, as shown in Table 4. At a personal level, teachers in Kicukiro district were ambivalent about whether they had sufficient knowledge and skills for GE and to teach global issues in their schools and classrooms (=3.00). However, they indicated that interest was not a barrier and would not prevent them from teaching global issues as part of their subject specialization (=2.70).

In addition to individual challenges, there are also systemic challenges that hinder teachers from effectively including these topics in their teaching, as shown Table 4. In this study, the systemic challenges construct consisted of five items, and the teachers were ambivalent about the impact of these challenges on their efforts to include GE in schools. Items three to seven had mean scores ranging from 2.82 to 3.12, indicating teachers’ indecisiveness. This suggests that systemic and external challenges, such as limited institutional, policy, and governmental support, have hindered the effective implementation of GE. To address this, it is essential to improve in-service teacher training, provide relevant GE materials, and ensure greater support from both authorities and school administrations to promote GE in schools (Schweisfurth, 2006; Lauwerier, 2020). This lack of sufficient institutional support, especially on training and professional development, can help understand teachers’ lack of confidence to teach GE, as they were uncertain of their ability to incorporate these issues in their schools.

4. Discussion

The present study was informed by the need to examine and understand the teachers’ views and perceptions of GE, and their preparedness to include GE in practice, especially in sub-Saharan Africa (Tsegay & Bekoe, 2020). The main objective of the study was to explore Rwandan teachers’ views of global education, with insights into their knowledge and awareness of GE, their perceptions and attitudes on the importance of GE, and the challenges they encounter in including GE as part of their everyday practice in schools. Despite the recent spreading of GE and GCE beyond western contexts, limited evidence has been found on this topic concerning the reality of Rwanda (Niyibizi et al., 2023; UNESCO, 2019).

The findings of this study suggest that teachers in Kicukiro district report varying levels of knowledge and awareness about GE and global issues, generally ranging from moderate to high. These results align with previous research highlighting differences in teachers’ knowledge of GE and related concepts, such as GCE (Schweisfurth, 2006). The literature has suggested that these differences are influenced by various factors, such as personal backgrounds, initial experiences, and exposure to these concepts (Schweisfurth, 2006; Rapoport, 2010; Fischman & Estellés, 2020), which would be of interest to future research. The findings of this study indicate that teachers reported to be knowledgeable and aware of global issues such as migration, causes of poverty around the world, the promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, and gender equality in the world and across different sectors. One possible explanation for this is that these global issues are frequently encountered at the local level in Rwanda and have a direct impact on the communities in which teachers work. Conversely, concepts such as global citizenship, human rights, and sustainable lifestyles were less known to the teachers in this district. The varying levels of knowledge and awareness among teachers regarding different global issues highlight the need for increased awareness and training in global education. This also confirms the existing gaps in teachers’ knowledge and understanding of global education and related concepts, as reported in the literature (Goren & Yemini, 2015; Myers & Rivero, 2019). Given that teachers appear to be more knowledgeable about GE topics with a more tangible presence in their local realities, these findings also suggest the importance of localizing GE, an idea that has gained prominence within the broader SDG agenda. A key direction for future research is to explore the factors that may explain the varying levels of familiarity with GE topics, as well as the pedagogical practices, policies, or initiatives related to them. This understanding is crucial for designing both initial and ongoing teacher training.

Most teachers recognized the significance of GE in developing students’ global competencies and its role in contributing to sustainable development both locally and globally. This aligns with existing literature that emphasizes the relevance of GE in addressing interconnected global challenges, such as climate change, human rights issues, and conflicts (Bruce et al., 2019). Furthermore, this finding becomes more meaningful in the context of Rwanda, a country with a history marked by global changes, as witnessed by the violence and conflicts leading to the 1994 genocide. The desire expressed by most of the teachers to incorporate GE into the CBC curriculum and in schools, reflects a convergence with a growing consensus that GE is important in preparing students in different contexts to become global citizens. Essentially, these findings suggest a robust link between the acknowledgement of the significance of GE in schools, its capacity and potential to address global challenges, and the imperative to incorporate it into educational frameworks as a means to foster the growth of a global society.

Nonetheless, the teachers were ambivalent concerning the balance between nurturing national identity and promoting GE through its incorporation in the Rwandan education system. Uncertainty prevailed over the prioritization of a strong national identity or cultivating GE and global perspectives through the curriculum. This finding reflects the existing debate in the field of education, wherein some scholars argue that globalization and concepts such as GE undermine national identity and promote cosmopolitanism (Catterall, 2011). On the other end, there are many who argue that GE and globalization, in general, reinforce national identity by strengthening and improving individuals’ understanding and appreciation of one’s nation within a global context (Calhoun 2007, cited in Ariely, 2012). Additionally, it is worth noting that this finding could be a result of the Rwandan government’s strong focus on education and parallel programs such as Itorero in fostering nationhood and national unity (Nzahabwanayo, 2018). Nevertheless, additional research is necessary to understand the precise role of these GE-related programs in shaping the representation and formation of perceptions of GE within the specific context of Rwanda.

The study also revealed various barriers that limited the integration and delivery of GE in schools in Kicukiro district. At the individual level, the main barrier was the insufficient knowledge and skills of teachers to teach GE effectively, in line with previous research (Schweisfurth, 2006; la Velle, 2020). At the systemic level, the main barriers were the lack of continuous professional development, in-service training and support, the lack of GE-specific materials and resources, and the lack of a clear GE policy framework in the curriculum. These findings are consistent with previous studies that have identified similar challenges for teaching GE in different contexts and gaps in the policy and practice of GE (Bourn, 2018; Van Werven et al., 2023; Shar, 2024).

5. Conclusions

This paper examined teachers’ knowledge, awareness, and perceptions of GE and the challenges they encounter in their attempts to integrate GE in schools and classrooms. The findings from Kicukiro district, Rwanda, add to the ongoing discussion on the role of education in the era of globalization and have implications for academic literature as well as policy for education in Rwanda and other countries endeavouring to integrate GE in the education system. First, the findings on teachers’ knowledge and awareness levels of GE, teachers’ recognition of the value of GE, and interest to integrate GE in their schools, as established by this study, could provide a basis and guideline for integrating GE and a global perspective to teaching and learning in Rwandan secondary schools. As Goren and Yemini (2015) argue, teachers’ knowledge and awareness of curriculum concepts should not be underestimated because they are key actors in any educational system. Secondly, the inhibitors to integrating GE in schools and classes suggested by this study could serve as a starting point for the provision of more and better training and professional development for the teachers, to prepare them to teach from a global perspective, and consequently transform the classrooms.

Even though 208 teachers participated in the study, the sample of participants was drawn from only one district and these findings might not represent all teachers in the Republic of Rwanda. Considering the existing ambiguity and contestations surrounding GE, future GE research among teachers in Rwanda would require a more in-depth study with a larger and more diverse representation from various districts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B., D.P.C. and L.G.C.; Methodology, A.B.; Formal analysis, L.G.C.; Investigation, A.B.; Writing—original draft, A.B.; Writing—review & editing, L.G.C. and D.P.C.; Supervision, L.G.C. and D.P.C.; Funding acquisition, A.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of FLUP of the University of Porto (N. 017 /CEFLUP/2021 2021-12-29.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study. All teachers signed and provided consent before data were collected from them.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author(s).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the data collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

CBC	Competence-Based Curriculum
GCE	Global Citizenship Education
GE	Global Education
GENE	Global Education Network Europe
OECD	Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
REB	Rwanda Education Board
UNESCO	United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization
UN	United Nations

Footnotes

Notes

1. Competence-Based Curriculum (CBC) is a curriculum Framework adopted by the Rwandan government in 2016 with the aim of developing learners’ competences rather than just their knowledge. It is characterized by approaches that are learner-centered, criterion-referenced, constructivist, and learning outcomes rather than content definition (REB, 2015).

2. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights#:~:text=Article%2026&text=Technical%20and%20professional%20education%20shall,human%20rights%20and%20fundamental%20freedoms (accessed on 20 July 2022).

3. A European network of governmental bodies and other agencies in education and development, with influence on national policies.

4. Considered to be a non-formal citizenship and values education program for high school leavers in post-genocide Rwanda.

5. Solidarity camps for students, teachers, government officials and returnees.

6. A national service for those between 10–35 years old to develop a sense of fraternity and national identity among the Rwandan youth.

7. A concept that breaks tribal beliefs brought by the colonial government and seeks to promote Rwandan values and beliefs.

8. We are together and also signifies unity.

9. Kicukiro district has 10 administrative sectors: Gahanga, Gatenga, Gikondo, Kanombe, Kagarama, Niboyi, Kigarama, Kicukiro, Masaka and Nyarugunga.

10. School categories included public schools, government-subsidised schools, and private schools.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figure and Tables

Figure 1 Distribution of schools by type.

Table 1

Teachers’ socio-demographic and educational characteristics (n = 208).

Category	Variable	Frequency (f)	Percent (%)
Gender	Male	120	57.7
	Female	88	42.3
Age	Below 25	12	5.8
	26–30	56	26.9
	31–35	57	27.4
	36–40	44	21.2
	41–45	24	11.5
	46–50	10	4.8
	51–55	3	1.4
	Above 56	2	1.0
Level of Education	Diploma	21	10.1
	Bachelors	172	82.7
	Masters	15	7.2
Teaching Experience	1–2 Years	31	14.9
	3–5 Years	53	25.5
	6–10 Years	64	30.8
	11–15 Years	42	20.2
	16–20 Years	10	4.8
	21–25 Years	4	1.9
	26–30 Years	3	1.4
	31 years and more	1	0.5

Table 2

Findings of teachers’ knowledge and awareness of global issues (n = 208); ($\overline{x}$ = 3.054).

No	Global Education Issues	Mode	Mean	Std. Deviation
1	Sustainable development	3.000	3.034	0.677
2	Sustainable lifestyles	3.000	2.913	0.737
3	Climate change and global warming	3.000	3.111	0.683
4	Environmental issues (e.g., desertification, destruction of tropical rainforests, and depletion of soil resources)	3.000	3.067	0.670
5	Global health (e.g., epidemics and diseases)	3.000	3.024	0.684
6	Migration (the movement of people)	3.000	3.163	0.661
7	The promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence	3.000	3.144	0.651
8	International conflicts and wars	3.000	3.120	0.645
9	Hunger or malnutrition in different parts of the world	3.000	3.115	0.634
10	Causes of poverty in the world	3.000	3.159	0.644
11	Equality between men and women in different parts of the world and in different sectors of life	3.000	3.144	0.620
12	Global citizenship	3.000	2.572	0.795
13	Human rights issues	3.000	2.909	0.685
14	Peoples’ different cultures and the appreciation of cultural diversity	3.000	3.087	0.654

Scale used: 1 = I have never heard of this; 2 = I have heard of this, but I am not able to explain what it means; 3 = I know about this, and I can explain the general issue; 4 = I am familiar with this, and I am able to explain it well.

Table 3

The importance of global education and need for its integration into curriculum and schools.

	% of Respondents on 4 and 5 *	Mean	Std. Deviation
Importance1. I believe global education is an important tool for helping students to become global citizens and in achieving the sustainable development agenda.	95.7	4.35	0.578
2. Global education is important in Rwanda and globally, now and in the future.	86	4.06	0.579
GE in curriculum and schools3. Global education should be incorporated into the school curriculum and be taught in schools.	94.2	4.45	0.635
4. In Rwanda, education should focus less on global awareness and global issues, but more on the development of national identity.	45.2	3.25	1.147
5. It is essential for secondary students to learn to become global citizens.	91.4	4.27	0.691

* Scale used: 1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Strongly agree.

Table 4

Challenges to teaching global education and global issues.

Item Description	% Respondents on 4 and 5 *	Mean	Std. Deviation
Individual/Personal Constraints
1. I have sufficient knowledge and skills to teach global education and global issues in school.	31.3	3.00	1.019
2. My low-interest level hinders me from teaching global issues.	17.7	2.70	0.953
Systemic Constraints
3. Education authorities and my school have provided me with continuous in-service training to improve my teaching skills on global issues.	32.7	3.12	0.998
4. I am provided with sufficient and current materials such as books to teach global issues in school.	26.4	2.95	0.984
5. The Competence-Based Curriculum policy allows me to teach global issues in school.	22.1	2.84	0.957
6. The overall school climate hinders me from teaching global issues.	20.7	2.82	0.914
7. I received training and materials on global education and global issues from the government through the Ministry of Education.	23.5	2.94	0.915

* Scale used: 1 = Strongly disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Neither agree nor disagree; 4 = Agree; 5 = Strongly agree.

References

Academic Network on Global Education & Learning (ANGEL). Global education digest 2022; Development Education Research Centre: 2022.

Albright, A. The global education challenge: Scaling up to tackle the learning crisis; 2019; Available online: https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-global-education-challenge-scaling-up-to-tackle-the-learning-crisis/ (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Altun, M. What global education should focus on. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies; 2017; 4, 1 pp. 82-86. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v4i1p82]

Andreotti, V.; de Souza, L. Translating theory into practice and walking minefields: Lessons from the project “through other eyes”. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning; 2008; 1, 1 pp. 23-36. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18546/IJDEGL.01.1.03]

Andreotti, V.; de Souza, L. Postcolonial perspectives on global citizenship education; Routledge: 2012; Vol. 1.

Ariely, G. Globalisation and the decline of national identity? An exploration across sixty-three countries. Nations and Nationalism; 2012; 18, 3 pp. 461-482. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8129.2011.00532.x]

Bakar, R.; Zakaria, S.; Isa, N.; Majid, N.; Razman, M. R. Teachers’ perception and roles regarding global Citizenship for sustainable development. Ecology, Environment and Conservation; 2021; 27, 1 pp. 209-215.

Bosire, A. M. Towards a curriculum for global education integration and implementation in Sub-Saharan Africa: An analysis of Rwanda’s secondary school curriculum; University of Porto: 2022; Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10216/145157 (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Bourn, D. Teachers as agents of social change. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning; 2016; 7, 3 pp. 63-77. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18546/IJDEGL.07.3.05]

Bourn, D. The global teacher. Understanding global skills for 21st century professionals; Palgrave Macmillan: 2018; pp. 163-200. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97655-6]

Bourn, D. The emergence of global education as a distinctive pedagogical field. Bourn, D. The Bloomsbury handbook of global education and learning; Bloomsbury Academic: 2020; pp. 11-22.

British Council. British council-Rwanda; 30 May 2022; Available online: https://www.britishcouncil.rw/programmes/education (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Bruce, J.; North, C.; Fitzpatrick, J. Globalisation, societies and education preservice teachers’ views of global citizenship and implications for global citizenship education. Globaliation, Societies and Education; 2019; 17, 2 pp. 161-176. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2018.1558049]

Cabezudo, A.; Cicala, F.; Luisa De Bivar Black, M.; Carvalho Da Silva, M. Global education guidelines-concepts and methodologies on global education for educators and policy makers responsibility: North-south centre of the council of Europe; 2019; Available online: https://www.coe.int/en/web/north-south-centre/global-education-resources (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Capalbo, R. Global education brief; 2013; Available online: https://www.academia.edu/31146085/Global_Education_Brief (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Catterall, P. Democracy, cosmopolitanism and national identity in a ‘globalising’ world. National Identities; 2011; 13, 4 pp. 329-347. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14608944.2011.629423]

Coelho, D. P.; Caramelo, J.; Açıkalın, M. Global education in Europe at crossroads: Contributions from critical perspectives. Journal of Social Science Education; 2020; 19, 4 pp. 1-7. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4119/jsse-4026]

Coelho, D. P.; Caramelo, J.; Amorim, J. P.; Menezes, I. Towards the transformative role of global citizenship education experiences in higher education: Crossing students’ and teachers’ views. Journal of Transformative Education; 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15413446221103190]

Creswell, J. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches; SAGE: 2014.

Davies, L. Interruptive democracy in education. Zahjda, J.; Davies, L.; Majhanovich, S. Comparative and global pedagogies: Equity, access & democracy in education; Springer: 2008; pp. 15-31.

Duarte, J.; Robinson-Jones, C. Bridging theory and practice: Conceptualizations of global citizenship education in Dutch secondary education. Globalization, Societies and Education; 2022; 22, 2 pp. 315-331. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2022.2048800]

Fischman, G. E.; Estellés, M. Global citizenship education in teacher education: Is there any alternative beyond redemptive dreams and nightmarish germs?. Schugurensky, D.; Wolhuter, C. Global citizenship education and teacher education: Theoretical and practical issues; 1st ed. Routledge: 2020; Vol. 1, pp. 102-124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781351129848-6]

Gadsby, H.; Bullivant, A. Global learning and sustainable development. Teaching contemporary themes in secondary education (p. 180); Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group: 2011; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203817407]

Generation Global. Empowering Rwandan youth with global citizenship skills; 26 November 2024; Available online: https://www.reb.gov.rw/news-detail/empowering-rwandan-youth-with-global-citizenship-skills (accessed on 14 December 2024).

Global Education Network Europe. European congress on global education in Europe to 2050; Global Education Network Europe: 15 July 2022; Available online: https://www.gene.eu/ge2050 (accessed on 14 December 2024).

Global Youth Connect. Rwanda; Global Youth Connect: 2020; Available online: https://www.globalyouthconnect.org/rwanda (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Goren, H.; Yemini, M. Global citizenship education in context: Teacher perceptions at an international school and a local Israeli school. A Journal of Comparative and International Education; 2015; 46, 5 pp. 832-853. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2015.1111752]

Hanvey, R. G. An attainable global perspective. Theory into Practice; 1982; 21, 3 pp. 162-167. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1476762 (accessed on 20 July 2022). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405848209543001]

Inka, L.; Niina, S. Global education from a teacher’s perspective; Laurea University of Applied Sciences: 2013.

Kerkhoff, S. N.; Cloud, M. E. Equipping teachers with globally competent practices: A mixed methods study on integrating global competence and teacher education. International Journal of Educational Research; 2020; 103, 101629. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101629] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32834467]

Laurie, R.; Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y.; Mckeown, R.; Hopkins, C. Contributions of education for sustainable development (ESD) to quality education: A synthesis of research. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development; 2016; 10, 2 pp. 226-242. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0973408216661442]

Lauwerier, T. Global citizenship education in west Africa: A promising concept?. Global citizenship education; Springer International Publishing: 2020; pp. 99-109. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44617-8_8]

la Velle, L. The challenges for teacher education in the 21st century: Urgency, complexity, and timeliness. Journal of Education for Teaching; 2020; 46, 1 pp. 1-3. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2019.1708621]

Ministry of Education-Rwanda. The republic of Rwanda ministry of education statistics; 2019; Available online: https://www.mineduc.gov.rw/index.php?eID=dumpFile&t=f&f=57556&token=46e2f488cbbedb7100d047093bf3e61cdaff908c (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Moloi, K. C.; Gravett, S. J.; Petersen, N. F. Globalization and its impact on education with specific reference to education in South Africa. Educational Management Administration and Leadership; 2009; 37, 2 pp. 278-297. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1741143208100302]

Myers, J. P.; Rivero, K. Preparing globally competent preservice teachers: The development of content knowledge, disciplinary skills, and instructional design. Teaching and Teacher Education; 2019; 77, pp. 214-225. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.008]

Never Again Rwanda. Never again Rwanda; 2022; Available online: https://neveragainrwanda.org/en/who-we-are (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Niyibizi, E.; Nyiramana, C.; Gahutu, C. Initial teacher training curriculum for global education in Rwanda: Between national and global perspectives and necessities. ZEP—Zeitschrift für Internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik; 2023; 46, 3 pp. 17-22. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31244/zep.2023.03.04]

Nzahabwanayo, S. What works in citizenship and values education: Attitudes of trainers towards the Itorero training program in post-genocide Rwanda. Rwandan Journal of Education; 2018; 4, 2 pp. 71-84.

Oxley, L.; Morris, P. Global citizenship: A typology for distinguishing its multiple conceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies; 2013; 61, 3 pp. 301-325. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2013.798393]

Parmigiani, D.; Jones, S. L.; Silvaggio, C.; Nicchia, E.; Ambrosini, A.; Pario, M.; Pedevilla, A.; Sardi, I. Assessing global competence within teacher education programs. How to design and create a set of rubrics with a modified Delphi method. SAGE Open; 2022; 12, 4 4. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21582440221128794]

Parsons, V. L. Stratified sampling. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics reference online; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: 2014; pp. 1-11.

Pashby, K.; da Costa, M.; Stein, S.; Andreotti, V. A meta-review of typologies of global citizenship education. Comparative Education; 2020; 56, 2 pp. 144-164. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2020.1723352]

Purdeková, A. Making UBUMWE power, state and camps in Rwanda’s unity-building project; Berghahn: 2015; Available online: www.berghahnbooks.com (accessed on 20 July 2022).

Quaynor, L. ‘I do not have the means to speak’: Educating youth for citizenship in post-conflict Liberia. Journal of Peace Education; 2015; 12, 1 pp. 15-36. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17400201.2014.931277]

Rapoport, A. We cannot teach what we don’t know: Indiana teachers talk about global citizenship education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice; 2010; 5, 3 pp. 179-190. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1746197910382256]

REB. Competence-based curriculum; REB/MINEDUC: 2015.

Reimers, F. What is global education and why does it matter?. Reimers, F. Educating students to improve the world; Springer Open: 2020; pp. 25-29.

Reynolds, R. Contesting and constructing international perspectives in global education. Reynolds, R.; Bradbery, D.; Brown, J.; Carroll, K.; Donnelly, D.; Ferguson-Patrick, K.; Macqueen, S. Contesting and constructing international perspectives in global education; 1st ed. Sense Publishers: 2015; pp. 27-43.

Roiha, A.; Sommier, M. Exploring teachers’ perceptions and practices of intercultural education in an international school. Intercultural Education; 2021; 32, 4 pp. 446-463. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2021.1893986]

Russell, G. Global discourses and local practices: Teaching citizenship and human rights in post genocide Rwanda. Comparative Education Review; 2018; 62, 3 pp. 385-408. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/698305]

Saperstein, E. Global citizenship education starts with teacher training and professional development. Journal of Global Education and Research; 2020; 4, 2 pp. 125-139. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2577-509X.4.2.1121]

Schweisfurth, M. Education for global citizenship: Teacher agency and curricular structure in Ontario schools. Educational Review; 2006; 58, 1 pp. 41-50. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131910500352648]

Shar, N. H. Global citizenship education in government secondary schools: A case study of government secondary schools in northern Sindh. Doctoral thesis; UCL (University College London): 2024.

Shea, J. Global education in Massachusetts: A study of the role of administrators. Doctoral thesis; Northeastern University: 2013.

Subedi, B. Reading the world through critical global perspectives. Subedi, B. Critical global perspectives: Rethinking knowledge about global societies; 1st ed. Information Age Publishing Inc.: 2010; Vol. 1, pp. 1-18.

Taka, M. The role of education in peacebuilding: Learner narratives from Rwanda. Journal of Peace Education; 2020; 17, 1 pp. 107-122. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17400201.2019.1669146]

Tsegay, S. M.; Bekoe, M. A. Global citizenship education and teacher education in Africa. Schugurensky, D.; Wolhuter, C. Global citizenship education in teacher education: Theoretical and practical issues; Routledge: 2020; pp. 139-160. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781351129848-8]

UNESCO. Global citizenship education: An emerging perspective; UNESCO: 2015.

UNESCO. Reconciliation through global citizenship education; UNESCO: 2018.

UNESCO. Educational content up close examining the learning dimensions of education for sustainable development and global citizenship education; UNESCO: 2019; Available online: https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/200004eng.pdf (accessed on 14 December 2024).

UNESCO. Global citizenship education and Peace Education; UNESCO: 2025; Available online: https://www.unesco.org/en/global-citizenship-peace-education/need-know?hub=87862 (accessed on 10 March 2025).

Van Werven, I. M.; Coelen, R. J.; Jansen, E. P. W. A.; Hofman, W. H. A. Global teaching competencies in primary education. A Journal of Comparative and International Education; 2023; 53, 1 pp. 37-54. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2020.1869520]

Waghid, Y. Cultivating global citizenship education and its implications for education in South Africa. Bosio, E. Conversations on global citizenship education: Perspectives on research, teaching, and learning in higher education; Routledge: 2021; pp. 62-71.

Willemse, T. M.; ten Dam, G.; Geijsel, F.; van Wessum, L.; Volman, M. Fostering teachers’ professional development for citizenship education. Teaching and Teacher Education; 2015; 49, pp. 118-127. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.03.008]

Wolansky, W. D. Nurturing global education in its infancy. International Research and Review: Journal of Phi Beta Delta Honour Society for International Scholars; 2016; 6, 1 11.