A meta-review of typologies of global citizenship education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports on a reflexive exercise contributing a meta-mapping of typologies of GCE and supplementary analysis of that mapping. Applying a heuristic of three main discursive orientations reflected in much of the literature on GCE – neoliberal, liberal, and critical – and their interfaces, we created a social cartography of how nine journal articles categorise GCE. We found the greatest confluence within the neoliberal, greatest number within the liberal, and a conflation of different ‘types’ of GCE within the critical orientation. We identified interfaces between neoliberal-liberal and liberal-critical orientations as well as new interfaces: neoconservative-neoliberal-liberal, critical-liberal-neoliberal, and critical-post critical. Despite considerable diversity of GCE orientations, we argue GCE typologies remain largely framed by a limited range of possibilities, particularly when considered as implicated in the modern-colonial imaginary. In a gesture toward expanding future possibilities for GCE, we propose a new set of distinctions between methodological, epistemological, and ontological levels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.052 | 0.051 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".