Search

The Praxis Project, established at University College Cork (UCC), Ireland, in 2018, seeks to assess possible models of best practice with regard to the integration of global citizenship and development education (GCDE) into a cross-disciplinary, cross-campus, interwoven set of subject area pedagogies, policies and practices. This study--the first part of an eventual three-part framework--asserts that the themes, theories, values, skills, approaches and methodologies relevant to transformative pedagogical work are best underpinned by ongoing staff dialogue in order to build communities of support around such systemic pedagogical change. This article is based on a collaborative study with the first cohort of UCC staff (2020-1), which demonstrates many ways in which staff and students realised that smaller actions and carefully directed attention to specific issues opened doors to transformative thinking and action in surprising ways. From this viewpoint, the striking need emerged for taking a strategic approach to how GCDE is, and should be, integrated into learning across subject areas.

Chinese pre-nationalist, culturalist concepts of world order and of self and other have remained a powerful part of Chinese nationalist conceptualisations of the world, self and other. Here, I analyse Chinese concepts regarding the challenge of including non-Chinese peoples into the Chinese nation-state. Carrying critiques of Levenson's 'culturalism-to-nationalism thesis' forward, I demonstrate how culturalist concepts of the world became merged with nationalist concepts. Nationalist objectives made it necessary to adjust culturalism to new functions. I analyse how culturalism became a handy tool used by nationalist thinkers Liang Qichao, Zhang Taiyan and Sun Yat-sen to match the general nationalist ideal of a nation's homogeneity with the Chinese nationalist ideal of the Chinese nation-state's multi-ethnic territory. Culturalist arguments helped to undermine the right to build own nation-states for non-Chinese peoples, by putting this right into relation with certain qualities of peoples – culture, history, and population size. The Chinese inner-state 'other', the non-Chinese peoples, have been conceptualised as inferior in every of these qualities to deny them the right to build nation-states and instead legitimate their inclusion into the Chinese nation-state. Nevertheless, non-Chinese peoples will never be full members of the nation-state, but remain in 'exclusive inclusion' like Agamben's homo sacer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]