Post-pandemic citizenship: The next phase of global citizenship education.

As globalization has grown, the concept of "global citizenship" has also evolved. The drive to expand citizenship beyond national borders spurred a nascent discipline known as global citizenship education (GCE). This article examines the continuum from globalization, to global citizenship, to a global pandemic (Covid-19)-and how the lessons from this growing age of globalism can serve as a blueprint for a new form of global citizenship following the pandemic, defined as "post-pandemic citizenship". The first part chronicles the drive toward globalization since the second half of the 20th century. The second part details the defining traits of global citizenship. The third part calls for a new form of global citizenship that should become part of GCE and be included in global-studies-related secondary-school courses and curricula in the wake of Covid-19-a so-called post-pandemic citizenship education (PPCE)-that emphasizes public health, empathy and compassion, self-sacrifice, and cooperative spirit. © UNESCO IBE 2021.

In recent years, the trends toward globalization have expanded the definition of citizenship beyond national borders (Acharya, 2012). The concept of “global citizenship” has become the focus of increasing attention in academic circles, spurring a nascent field of study appropriately named global citizenship education (GCE) (Brigham, 2011; Fernekes, 2016). The scope and scale of the challenge posed by the Covid-19 pandemic have served to highlight the major issues facing the world today and the continued importance of international collaboration and purpose.

Since 2020, the Covid-19 outbreak has brought the world to a standstill. The pandemic has upended daily life and, in so doing, it has revolutionized the way in which we work, learn, and otherwise interact (Fancera & Saperstein, 2021). Even more, the pandemic has further exposed deep-rooted inequities in public health, the economy, race relations, and the environment. In his nomination speech for president, Joe Biden (2020) alluded to these four historic crises, including the “worst pandemic in over 100 years. The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The most compelling call for racial justice since the 60’s. And the undeniable realities and accelerating threats of climate change”.

In this article I examine the ongoing continuum from globalization, to global citizenship, to a global pandemic—and how the lessons from this growing age of globalism can serve as a blueprint for a new form of global citizenship following the pandemic, defined as “post-pandemic citizenship”. In the first part, I chronicle the drive toward globalization (political, economic, and cultural) since the second half of the 20th century. In the second part, I detail the defining traits of global citizenship. In the third part, I call for a new form of global citizenship in the wake of Covid-19—a so-called post-pandemic citizenship education (PPCE)—that emphasizes public health, empathy and compassion, self-sacrifice, and cooperative spirit. This new form of citizenship should become part of GCE and be included in global-studies secondary-school related courses and curricula.

The drive toward globalization

Despite some setbacks over the years, since the second half of the 20th century there has been a growing movement toward and recognition of globalization—political, economic, and cultural. Europe is among the more notable examples of this trend. Indeed, in the aftermath of World War II, Europe began the process of transforming from a patchwork of sovereign nation-states to a community of nations (Bickerton, 2012). Through several treaties over the decades following World War II, a rising number of European countries entered into enduring political and economic alliances (McCormick, 1999; Shore, 2000). With the culmination of the European Union (EU), Europe became a more interconnected global community (Follesdal, 2002; Maas, 2014)—and with the ever-looming threat of communist takeover during the ensuing Cold War, European countries hastened to align their foreign and security policies (Feld, 1998; Saperstein, 2008). And, despite the recent Brexit movement arising out of the United Kingdom (Pettifor, 2017), through the EU and a near fifty-year Cold War, European nations created a lasting shared identity and “common citizenship status for citizens of EU member states” (Maas, 2014, p. 409).

Countries outside of Europe have also increasingly entered into cross-national agreements and unions, such as the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), the African Union (AU), the Association of Southeast Nations (ASEAN), and the Southern Common Market (Mercado Común del Sur; MERCOSUR) (Shaw et al., 2011; Swanson, 2020; Telò, 2014). While these regional and continental groups do not grant the same breadth of transnational rights and freedoms as provided by the EU, they have served to strengthen political ties and to promote economic integration (Falk, 2002; Maas, 2014). Yet recent efforts to expand upon these agreements and unions have been modest at best (Natalegawa, 2018; Swanson, 2020). And, while some have welcomed global governance and “cosmopolitan democracy” (Archibugi, 2008; Caney, 2005; Held, 1995), others have lamented the rise of international institutions (Axtmann, 2002; Hawthorn, 2003; Zolo, 1997).

Over the past few decades, economic globalization has also brought individuals, neighborhoods, local communities, and nations together (Langran, 2016; Zhao, 2014). Companies and corporations have increasingly spread to other parts of the world (Kordos & Vojtovic, 2016). Consequently, citizens have felt less isolated and more part of a global community (Csaba, 2003; Stiglitz, 2002), leading to “important implications for the nature and prospects of global citizenship” (Newlands, 2002, p. 213).

Despite this, economic globalization can have negative consequences for global citizens (Buckman, 2004; Cavanagh et al., 2002; Langran, 2016), including higher unemployment for failing companies and deterioration of the “natural environment and the health, safety, working conditions and wages of employees” (Newlands, 2002, p. 217). Economic globalization can also favor the interests of corporations over those of everyday citizens (Cruikshank, 1998), as a growing disparity between the rich and poor, and worldwide recessions, serve as further evidence that global financial institutions have failed to cure the inequities of capitalism (Cruikshank, 1998; Tuca, 2014).

Cultural globalization has also kept pace with the political and economic trends of globalization following World War II. Take the United States, for example, which over decades has projected and exported popular culture across the globe, including cinema, music, art, commercial products, food, sports, clothing, and the internet (Crane, 2014; Crothers, 2007; Saperstein, 2010; Van Elteren, 2011). During this time period, the world has also witnessed an unprecedented telecommunications or digital revolution (e.g., computers, cellular phones, and social media) (Kolodko, 2011) that redefined global borders (Ahmad, 2013; Crothers, 2007). While some see cultural globalization as a positive force that promotes progress, understanding, and diversity among global citizens (Rothkopf, 1997; Wang, 2007), others have considered it a threat to their local identity or culture, and express skepticism that a global village, culture, or society exists in reality (Guibernau, 2007; Guillén, 2001; Hirst & Thompson, 1996). It is through these rising political, economic, and cultural connections (and tensions) that the concept of global citizenship has emerged.

The emergence of global citizenship and global citizenship education

The concept of global citizenship is subject to ongoing interpretations and meaning and has been defined by a growing number of international bodies and institutions (Oxfam, 2006; UNESCO, 2015; UNICEF, 2013). UNESCO describes global citizenship broadly as “belonging to a broader community and common humanity”, and “political, economic, social and cultural interdependency and interconnectedness between the local, the national and the global” (UNESCO, 2015, p. 14). UNICEF assigns further traits to a global citizen, including:Oxfam includes similar characteristics when defining global citizenship, adding:Scholars have echoed similar definitions of global citizenship (Carter, 2001; Diaz et al., 1999; Noddings, 2005; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). Diaz et al., (1999, p. 191) define a global citizen as one “who is characterized by an attitude of openness toward all others, irrespective of their gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion, and language”. Noddings (2005) highlights the need for economic and social justice, as well as the need to protect the earth, embrace social and cultural diversity, and educate for peace. Carter (2001, p. 98) agrees that global citizens are dedicated to “social justice, diversity, sustainable economic development respecting the environment, and to a peaceful world”. Reysen and Katzarska-Miller (2013) sum up global citizenship through the following six traits, detailed further below:

Appreciation for diversity and global interconnectedness;

Desire to confront societal inequities;

Willingness to act meaningfully (UNICEF, 2013).

Concern for environmental problems;

Commitment to sustainability;

Ability to critically think and reason;

Appreciation and empathy for others to promote conflict resolution;

Recognition of self-worth and identity (Oxfam, 2006).

Global awareness;

Caring;

Cultural diversity;

Social justice;

Sustainability;

Responsibility to act.

Global awareness

Global awareness, the first trait of global citizenship, is about understanding the interrelated nature of the world (Dower, 2002; Pike, 2008), including “globalization and the resulting issues and problems that affect everyone’s lives” (Gibson et al., 2008, p. 15). Werner and Case (1997) have defined global awareness to include knowledge of cultural principles and traditions, appreciation for the interconnected nature of global systems, understanding of global concerns, and recognition of the global past and future. Global citizenship requires global awareness to address pressing economic, social, environmental, cultural, and ethical issues (Noddings, 2005).

In business practice, employers have increasingly stressed the importance of understanding different cultures and developing 21st century skills (Bruett, 2006; Mendoza, 2007) by, for example, studying abroad (Trooboff et al., 2008). The Partnership for 21st Century Learning (2009) emphasizes in particular that global awareness promotes collaboration in the workplace and broader community. Given the demands of a rapidly changing world, global awareness has become increasingly necessary for leaders and employees of various industries (Bowerman & Van Wart, 2014; Milman, 2015). Exhibiting global awareness can create more career opportunities, improve decision making, and enhance entrepreneurial and leadership skills (Goldsmith, 2012).

In education, colleges and universities also have increasingly emphasized studying abroad as a way to learn another language and become more culturally aware (DeLoach et al., 2015; Gieser, 2015; Haring-Smith, 2011; Kurt et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2014). As Clarke (2004, p. 68) argues, “foreign languages are essential for a world of intercultural convergence” and a necessary part of a curriculum. For pre-service teachers, study abroad experiences have helped foster global citizenship and develop global awareness or cultural competency in languages, values, and customs (Byker & Putman, 2019; Klein & Wikan, 2019; Kyei-Blankson & Nur-Awaleh, 2018). While pre-service teachers tend to have more study abroad opportunities, in-service teachers also benefit from programs that emphasize cultural immersion, teaching, language acquisition, reflection, and collaboration (He et al., 2017). In-service teachers may even further their intercultural knowledge and global awareness through short-term (two to eight weeks) study abroad programs (He et al., 2017; Reimers, 2020).

At the same time, adding global citizenship to textbooks (Lee, 2020) or resource books used in primary and secondary schools can help to nurture “globally aware, globally minded, and globally proficient” students (Reimers, 2020, p. 1). For instance, the three-step model known as Global Citizenship 1-2-3 helps students to learn, think, and act responsibly by developing global awareness through experiential learning (Putman & Byker, 2020). Sisk (2010) and Roeper (2008) focus specifically on gifted children or students “who exhibit high ability across one or more academic subject areas” (Bates & Munday, 2005, p. 4). Their studies have shown that gifted students, with the support of loving and caring adults, can develop the global awareness of a global citizen—that is, “empathy and sensitivity to justice, honesty, fairness, and a sense of responsibility for making a difference” (Sisk, 2010, p. 10), and “aware[ness] of the world around them” (Roeper, 2008, p. 9). In sum, incorporating global awareness into curricula has helped students to understand and address important 21st-century challenges (Burnouf, 2004).

Caring

Caring for the global community and humanity is a responsibility shared by globally conscious citizens (Dill, 2013). According to UNESCO (2015, p. 29), one of the key learner attributes for a global citizen is “to develop motivation and willingness to care for the common good”. For instance, in the medical field, nurses care for a global population that transcends borders and cultural barriers (Cesario, 2017). Indeed, to be both a global citizen and a cosmopolitan nurse, “requires participation in, and valuing of, the common good of society as a whole” (Petit dit Dariel, 2009, p. 569).

“Caring” is also an important ethos for teachers entering the profession (Hawks & Pillay, 2017). Over the past few decades, countries like Sweden have started to incorporate the principle of “care” into their pedagogy for students at an early age (Johansson, 2009). Ruby (2014, p. 54) concludes that “as we debate the ways to educate young people for global roles . . . a duty of all is . . . to care for others”.

Cultural diversity

Global citizenship also emphasizes “shared membership and shared global values” (Mullens & Cuper, 2012, p. 44), and “embracing cultural diversity” (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013, p. 860). Ibrahim (2004) specifically connects global citizenship with the concept of “cultural diversity”, calling for organizations to promote multiculturalism both locally and globally. Additionally, UNESCO (2002, p. 62) noted in its Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity that cultural diversity is “the common heritage of humanity” and “is embodied in the uniqueness and plurality of the identities of the groups and societies making up humankind”.

In Spain, for instance, cultural diversity is part of a broader educational curriculum (Engel, 2014). Exploring Spain’s 2006 Education for Citizenship and Human Rights curriculum (replaced in 2013) along with corresponding textbooks, Engel (2014, p. 251) explains that “cultural diversity is conveyed largely through non-threatening ideas of global connections such as in relation to food, festivals, and flags”. The 2016 Annual Report of National Commissions for UNESCO also emphasizes cultural diversity and interdependence as part of a global-citizenship-related curriculum (UNESCO, 2016). Banks (2003, p. 19) maintains the importance of citizens in diverse democratic societies being literate, thoughtful, ethical, and engaged “citizens of their nation and the world”.

Others, however, have expressed concern that shared global values may discourage cultural diversity (Arneil, 2007; Cheng, 2012). Cheng (2012, p. 157) speaks to the concerns of undermining the character of local cultures and instead calls for “a global mosaic of multiple, pluralistic knowledge societies, each rooted in its own unique cultural identity”. Arneil (2007, p. 315) also takes issue with “anchoring citizenship at the global level in a set of shared values”, warning of “the potential to do violence to cultural diversity at best or engage in western cultural imperialism at worst”. As Zayani (2011, p. 49) concludes, preserving cultural diversity “is a complex endeavor”.

Social justice

Social justice broadly refers to a process whereby every individual or group works to challenge oppression and receive the same opportunity, (Bell, 2007; Bhugra, 2016; Garcia & Van Soest, 2006; Greene, 1998) inclusive of not only cultural but also racial, religious, ethnic, and language diversity (Banks, 2004). Scholars have expressly tied the principle of “social justice” to a globalizing world (Brock, 2009; Fraser, 2009). Brock (2009), for instance, calls for a cosmopolitan model of global justice that addresses various international challenges while preserving the national identity of citizens. To achieve social justice in a globalizing world, Fraser (2009) speaks to redistribution (socioeconomic opportunity), recognition (social identity or standing), and representation (political affairs).

Moreover, social justice education and pedagogy have provided teachers with growing opportunities to raise social awareness in the classroom (Adams, 2007; Hytten, 2015). Adams (2007, p. 30) notes that educators can foster “connections between awareness and action by helping participants recognize various spheres of influence in their daily lives”. Howe and Xu (2013) also stress social action, calling for teachers to play a significant role in fostering both social justice and global citizenship. With the assistance and guidance of teachers, students can learn to “share the world and live together in harmony and peace” (Howe & Xu, 2013, p. 41).

Sustainability

Global citizenship also requires sustainability—environmental, economic, and social. Environmentally speaking, scholars have recognized the responsibility citizens share in affecting our supply of natural resources and materials (Dobson, 2011; Heater, 2004; Marzall, 2005). Heater (2004, p. 12) views it as “a moral responsibility”; Marzall (2005) advocates for environmental laws and ethics; and Dobson (2011, p. 10) stresses “fairness of the distribution of environmental goods”. To address climate change and other critical environmental challenges, educational institutions have accordingly recognized the importance of sustainability research (Brundiers & Wiek, 2011; Rowe, 2007).

Economically speaking, to build a more sustainable and just society, Penner and Sanderse (2017) call for the inclusion of economic citizenship education (ECE) in school curricula at the local, national, and global level. Ensuring long-term economic sustainability is also critical at the organizational level, as companies seek to adopt responsible management strategies and practices (Laasch & Conaway, 2015). And, socially speaking, Barbier (1987) broadly defines sustainability as adhering to values, customs, and characteristics. Polèse and Stren (2000, pp. 15–16) define it as “compatible cohabitation of culturally and socially diverse groups . . . encouraging social integration”. For example, in a business setting, social sustainability refers to a “corporation internally creat[ing] a supportive and developmental environment for staff” (Benn & Bolton, 2011, p. 64). Tying these concepts together, global citizens have an environmental, economic, and social responsibility to protect and safeguard the quality of life and rights of others through community initiatives (Leslie, 2009).

Responsibility to act

The responsibility to act requires a global citizen who “knows how the world works, is outraged by injustice and who is both willing and enabled to take action to meet this global challenge” (Oxfam, 1997, p. 1). Responsibility also “involves being proactive, and taking the initiative . . . rather than waiting for others to take the first steps” (Schattle, 2008, p. 44). Global citizens feel a duty to initiate change, inspiring others to join the cause on their own volition (Schattle, 2008). One of the more notable, wide-reaching examples of this commitment to act is the Global Poverty Project cofounded by Hugh Evans and Simon Moss in 2008 (Bryan, 2016; McKinley, 2012). Among the global citizenship initiatives of this project is the Global Citizen Festival, which brings world leaders, celebrities, and activists together to raise awareness and money for global causes (Bryan, 2016).

There are other important, albeit less publicized, examples of action initiatives. For example, William Gaudelli (2016) designed and cofounded the Global Competence Certificate (GCC) program at Columbia University’s Teachers College (Levine, 2014). Partnering with World Savvy and the Asia Society, this program helps teachers become more proficient in global issues by taking online courses and traveling abroad to Bangladesh, Tanzania, Colombia, or Uganda (Levine, 2014). Another initiative, the Belize Education Project, encourages students and teachers in the United States and Belize to take action and create lasting partnerships (Fry et al., 2012). Moreover, The Global Citizens’ Initiative (TGCI), founded by Ron Israel (2012), strives to further the goals of global citizenship through advocacy, citizen engagement, and education.

To initiate this call to action and educate for global citizenship, Gaudelli (2015) proposes three recommendations: adopting curricular reforms; encouraging teachers and students to embrace exchange programs and online discussion forums; and calling for citizens to create gardens and grow food in order for students to better understand the ecosystem. Through dialogue and collaboration, teachers can effect change in the classroom and prepare citizens to meet some of the pressing global challenges (Gaudelli, 2016). As Gunzelmann (2014, p. 173) concludes, “We all must come to terms and step up to take responsibility, for each and every one of us plays an important part in the outcome of our global world”.

Post-pandemic citizenship

The Covid-19 pandemic is far from over. But it is clear from the past year that the pandemic has revealed the depth of many challenges that global citizens have sought for years to address. As months turn to years, and as the world tries to rebuild in the aftermath of the pandemic, it is imperative that a new sense of global citizenship guide international efforts regarding public health, economic and social justice, the environment, and much more. Accordingly, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic and the ensuing results, the concept of global citizenship should expand to include a new form of such citizenship—a post-pandemic citizenship—to rebuild a better world in the wake of a once-in-a-century pandemic. Indeed, to repair a post-pandemic world, post-pandemic citizens should dedicate themselves to promoting public health, exhibiting empathy and compassion, committing to self-sacrifice, and embracing a cooperative spirit locally, nationally, and globally.

First, as it relates to public health, to further post-pandemic citizenship, governments across the world should continue collaborating and investing more in research to prevent future pandemics. This begins with a sustained worldwide campaign to develop and distribute safe and effective Covid-19 vaccines (McCausland, 2020). In particular, high-income countries must work together to disseminate and administer more vaccine doses to middle-income and low-income countries. One such initiative, the Covid-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX) program, has regrettably fallen short of its initial delivery target for several reasons, including vaccine nationalism (nations putting their own vaccine supply needs and interests above everyone else) (Eccleston-Turner & Upton, 2021; Leggae & Kim, 2021). With increased global cooperation, COVAX and similar initiatives should strive to ensure more vaccine equity between wealthy and poor nations. As Katz et al. (2021, p. 1283) point out, “such cooperation is not only a matter of social justice, it is also a sound pragmatic response to ending a pandemic in which a virus and its variants easily cross borders”. At the same time, global citizens in the medical community should build on vaccine technology (i.e., using mRNA to stimulate an immune response) to address other current health issues.

Second, given the tragic toll on human life resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic, a post-pandemic citizen should demonstrate the level of empathy and compassion needed in a post-pandemic world. Empathy includes listening, committing acts of service, and being attentive to the plight of others (Singh & Singh, 2020). Citizens must demonstrate not only empathy but also compassion for others and oneself (Galea, 2020; Slavich et al., 2021). Exhibiting compassion could include assisting members in the community (e.g., providing emotional, social, financial, or medical support), especially the vulnerable population. Self-compassion refers to valuing one’s own well-being (Slavich et al., 2021).

Third, a post-pandemic citizen should commit to self-sacrifice to protect the common good of society over individual self-interests. Hollings (2020, p. 87) explains that it “requires a caring citizen, one who cares about the potential for others to get sick”. While the Covid-19 pandemic has brought out the very best in many citizens, it also has exposed an unprecedented level of selfishness and ignorance. Too many consistently defied safety protocols established by infectious disease specialists and public health experts. Take mask-wearing as an example. In certain countries, not wearing a mask has become a political statement even though the science is settled on its efficacy (He & Laurent, 2020). Not practicing social distancing (staying two meters [six feet] apart) also has turned into a political act even when the data proves that it slows the spread of infection (Ansell et al., 2021; Zimmerman & Benjamin, 2021). As Slavich et al. (2021, p. 5) explain, “reframing physical isolation as a necessary act of solidarity and togetherness may help promote perceptions of social integration and belonging in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic”. This pandemic has served as a painful reminder of putting the well-being of others ahead of our own self-interest and indulgences. As such, government leaders, public health officials, and everyday citizens have a responsibility to promote the collective good in the future, even if it is at the so-called expense of individual liberty.

Fourth, a post-pandemic citizen should embrace a cooperative spirit locally, nationally, and globally—and there have been a number of examples of such cooperation since the pandemic. At the local level, citizens benefit from uniting behind a common cause and purpose. Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, many local schools, businesses, and agencies around the world—in the name of public health and safety—were asked to comply with guidelines to slow the spread of the virus (UN, 2020). At the national level, many governments have encouraged cooperation among public- and private-sector institutions (OECD, 2020)—whether they be research institutes, universities, businesses, or nonprofit organizations. These public-private partnerships have collectively shared resources, risks, and rewards to accelerate the production of therapeutics and vaccines (Deloitte, 2020). At the global level, various institutions developed an international strategy to contain and defeat the pandemic (UN, 2020). This included distributing medical equipment, treatments, and vaccines, while strengthening existing multilateral institutions to prevent similar crises in the future (UN, 2020).

Post-pandemic citizenship education

Global citizenship “focuses on preparation for civic engagement in increasingly diverse and global contexts” (Whitehead, 2015, p. 8). As global citizenship has emerged, so too has GCE in secondary school curricula across various countries (Bickmore, 2014; Brown et al., 2009; Chong, 2015; Davies et al., 2005; Evans et al., 2009; Motani, 2007; Myers, 2020). GCE is perhaps best defined as an instructional field that seeks to hone students’ critical thinking skills while teaching them to be agents of change in society (Bickmore, 2009; Peterson & Warwick, 2015; UNESCO, 2015). GCE also seeks to strengthen cross-cultural awareness through the study of contemporary international issues and provide students with the requisite knowledge, skills, and values to actively participate in a global society (Gallavan, 2008; Guo, 2014; Maguth, 2012; Myers, 2006).

In response to the Covid-19 pandemic, secondary schools should reexamine the scope and sequence of knowledge, skills, and values within GCE curricula to address the lessons of the pandemic. As such, this article proposes that secondary schools begin to offer a GCE-type course or content that includes, as a minimum, the following five PPCE-related units.

The first unit should introduce and define “post-pandemic citizenship”. Students should discuss the key traits of a post-pandemic citizen. Students also should write an essay on what it means to be a post-pandemic citizen.

The second unit should examine the public health issues that arise during a pandemic. Students should study how different countries prepared and responded to Covid-19 and other pandemics throughout history. Students should also discuss how to create effective prevention and treatment programs along with vaccines. Students should then develop an action plan to confront a future pandemic.

The third unit should address the importance of instilling empathy and compassion in citizens. Students should explore ways to understand and identify with citizens facing other global health challenges, including poverty, world hunger, child mortality, and malnutrition. Through inquiry-based learning, students should conduct scholarly research and prescribe solutions to these problems.

The fourth unit should explore the concept of self-sacrifice. Students should consider scenarios where citizens choose collective responsibility over their own self-interest. Through simulations and social media campaigns, students should discuss how to sacrifice for the collective good in the areas of health, economics, social justice, and the environment.

The fifth unit should emphasize the importance of embracing a cooperative spirit. Students should examine current local, national, and global initiatives as well as the civic duties of a post-pandemic citizen. Through project-based and experiential learning, students should research a global challenge and develop an action plan for a post-pandemic world.

Conclusion

Since the second half of the 20th century, the concept of global citizenship has grown out of the rising tides of political, economic, and cultural globalization. These citizens are defined by several key traits, including global awareness, caring, embracing cultural diversity, advocating for social justice, promoting sustainability, and the responsibility to act (Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). Consequently, GCE has sought to promote these concepts and develop students’ analytical and critical thinking skills, while drawing connections between local and global issues.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, educational institutions at the secondary level should begin to emphasize a new form of global citizenship, post-pandemic citizenship, in global-studies-related courses and curricula (PPCE). By focusing on public health, empathy and compassion, self-sacrifice, and a cooperative spirit, the next generation of global citizenry can begin the process of navigating a post-pandemic world.