developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication...

9
Developing preservice teachers’ global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology Guichun Zong * Kennesaw State University,1000 Chastain Road, Kennesaw, GA 30144, USA article info Article history: Received 27 May 2007 Received in revised form 29 August 2008 Accepted 29 September 2008 Keywords: Global education Cross-cultural understanding Computer-mediated communication Preservice teacher education abstract This study examines preservice teachers’ conceptual understanding of global education subsequent to participation in an asynchronous web-based multinational project to discuss issues related to cultural diversity and global challenges. Data included 59 preservice teachers’ online messages and reflective essays. Six perspectives emerged from this inquiry: global education as cultural learning and under- standing, fostering tolerance, addressing global issues, teaching global connections and collaborations, promoting peace, and critical understanding of global issues and events. The findings suggest that the online discussion provided a unique opportunity for participants to interact with teachers and students from different countries in an authentic context. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Teacher educators today are faced with an urgent responsibility to transform curriculum and pedagogy to respond to the acceler- ating growth of global interdependence in economy, technology, politics, and culture. Scholars and organizations in education, such as American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), and the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) have long called for global education in both Kindergarten to high school classrooms and teacher education programs (AACTE, 1994; Ander- son,1991; Merryfield,1997; NCSS, 2001; Parker, Ninomiya, & Cogan, 1999; Quezada & Cordeiro, 2007; Tucker & Cistone,1991; Tye,1999). The reasoning underlying such advocacy is that in an inter- connected world our survival and well-being are directly related to our capacity to understand and deal responsibly and effectively with other peoples and nations and with a variety of issues that cut across national boundaries. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and their aftermath have again challenged educators to rethink what students should know and understand about the world (Dunn, 2002; Friedman, 2005; Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004; Merryfield & Wilson, 2005; Shapiro & Purpel, 2005; Stewart, 2007). Despite the plethora of rhetoric about the need to help students understand the increasingly interdependent world and decades of theory and curriculum development, there is a paucity of schol- arship examining the practice of teachers or teacher educators to teach from a global perspective in the reality of classrooms (Gaudelli, 2003; Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004; Merryfield, 2003; Zong , Wilson, & Quashigah, 2008). In the latest edition of the Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (Cochran-Smith, Feiman-Nemser, McIntyre, & Demers, 2008), there is no mention of global education or globalization. In a search through the entire index, the word global is not mentioned nor is the word international. Similarly, the American Educational Research Associ- ation (AERA) Report on Research and Teacher Education (Cochran- Smith & Zeichner, 2005) made no mention of global education or globalization. It bears reiterating that global education has generally lacked a firm empirical foundation through much of its history. Rapid developments in computer technology have allowed U.S. students unprecedented access to information about people, cultures, and events from around the world. Scholars argue that the dual features of Internet-based technology in providing access to up-to-date worldwide information and allowing instant commu- nication across time and space have great potential in facilitating international and global understanding (Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; Merryfield, 2003; Zong, 2002). In this study, I examine whether participation in a computer-mediated communication (CMC) project to discuss a range of cultural and global issues with students and teachers from over 20 countries could make an impact on preservice teachers’ global understanding and how they assign meaning and purpose to global education. 2. Framing the study This study is framed around two sets of ideas: theory and research on global education and social constructive learning in the * Tel.: þ1 770 423 6747; fax: þ1 770 420 4334. E-mail address: [email protected] Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate 0742-051X/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.016 Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625

Upload: guichun-zong

Post on 29-Oct-2016

218 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

lable at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625

Contents lists avai

Teaching and Teacher Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/ tate

Developing preservice teachers’ global understanding throughcomputer-mediated communication technology

Guichun Zong*

Kennesaw State University, 1000 Chastain Road, Kennesaw, GA 30144, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 27 May 2007Received in revised form 29 August 2008Accepted 29 September 2008

Keywords:Global educationCross-cultural understandingComputer-mediated communicationPreservice teacher education

* Tel.: þ1 770 423 6747; fax: þ1 770 420 4334.E-mail address: [email protected]

0742-051X/$ – see front matter � 2008 Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.09.016

a b s t r a c t

This study examines preservice teachers’ conceptual understanding of global education subsequent toparticipation in an asynchronous web-based multinational project to discuss issues related to culturaldiversity and global challenges. Data included 59 preservice teachers’ online messages and reflectiveessays. Six perspectives emerged from this inquiry: global education as cultural learning and under-standing, fostering tolerance, addressing global issues, teaching global connections and collaborations,promoting peace, and critical understanding of global issues and events. The findings suggest that theonline discussion provided a unique opportunity for participants to interact with teachers and studentsfrom different countries in an authentic context.

� 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Teacher educators today are faced with an urgent responsibilityto transform curriculum and pedagogy to respond to the acceler-ating growth of global interdependence in economy, technology,politics, and culture. Scholars and organizations in education, suchas American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE),and the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) have longcalled for global education in both Kindergarten to high schoolclassrooms and teacher education programs (AACTE, 1994; Ander-son,1991; Merryfield,1997; NCSS, 2001; Parker, Ninomiya, & Cogan,1999; Quezada & Cordeiro, 2007; Tucker & Cistone,1991; Tye,1999).The reasoning underlying such advocacy is that in an inter-connected world our survival and well-being are directly related toour capacity to understand and deal responsibly and effectivelywith other peoples and nations and with a variety of issues that cutacross national boundaries. The terrorist attacks of September 11,2001 and their aftermath have again challenged educators torethink what students should know and understand about theworld (Dunn, 2002; Friedman, 2005; Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004;Merryfield & Wilson, 2005; Shapiro & Purpel, 2005; Stewart, 2007).

Despite the plethora of rhetoric about the need to help studentsunderstand the increasingly interdependent world and decadesof theory and curriculum development, there is a paucity of schol-arship examining the practice of teachers or teacher educatorsto teach from a global perspective in the reality of classrooms

All rights reserved.

(Gaudelli, 2003; Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004; Merryfield, 2003; Zong ,Wilson, & Quashigah, 2008). In the latest edition of the Handbook ofresearch on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts(Cochran-Smith, Feiman-Nemser, McIntyre, & Demers, 2008), there isno mention of global education or globalization. In a search throughthe entire index, the word global is not mentioned nor is the wordinternational. Similarly, the American Educational Research Associ-ation (AERA) Report on Research and Teacher Education (Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005) made no mention of global education orglobalization. It bears reiterating that global education has generallylacked a firm empirical foundation through much of its history.

Rapid developments in computer technology have allowed U.S.students unprecedented access to information about people,cultures, and events from around the world. Scholars argue that thedual features of Internet-based technology in providing access toup-to-date worldwide information and allowing instant commu-nication across time and space have great potential in facilitatinginternational and global understanding (Doolittle & Hicks, 2003;Merryfield, 2003; Zong, 2002). In this study, I examine whetherparticipation in a computer-mediated communication (CMC)project to discuss a range of cultural and global issues with studentsand teachers from over 20 countries could make an impact onpreservice teachers’ global understanding and how they assignmeaning and purpose to global education.

2. Framing the study

This study is framed around two sets of ideas: theory andresearch on global education and social constructive learning in the

Page 2: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625618

context of CMC supported environment. These theoreticalperspectives help explain part of the framework utilized in shapingthe investigation, interpreting data, and generating inferences toexplain results.

2.1. Conceptualizing global education

This study first draws upon theory and research related to globaleducation. Since early 1970s, scholars have advocated for globaleducation to prepare students for the world that is becomingincreasingly interconnected among its peoples and nations. Usingsuch terms as global village, internationalization, and more recentlyand frequently, globalization, proponents argue that the impact ofdynamic multinational transactions and cross-cultural interactionsbrought by international trade, foreign investment, tourism,immigration, cultural exchange is felt in virtually every localcommunity and that teaching from a global perspective shouldbecome an essential aspect of school curriculum in order to betterprepare students to make informed choices for the future.

Much published work on global education attempts to addressthis emerging curriculum field’s scope, focus, and direction(Anderson, 1991; Case, 1993; Hanvey, 1976; Hicks & Holden, 2007;Merryfield, 2002; Noddings, 2005). Hanvey’s (1976) integratednotion of a global perspective has been most influential in devel-oping global teacher education programs in the United States(Merryfield, 1997). It consists of five interrelated dimensions: (a)perspective consciousness: an awareness of and appreciation forother images of the world; (b) state-of-the-planet awareness: anin-depth understanding of the prevailing global issues, events, andconditions; (c) cross-cultural awareness: a general understandingof the characteristic of world cultures with an emphasis onunderstanding differences and similarities; (d) knowledge of globaldynamics: a familiarity with the nature of systems and an intro-duction to the complex international system in which state andnonstate actors are linked in patterns of interdependence andconsciousness of global change; and (e) awareness of humanchoices: a review of strategies for action on issues in local, national,and international settings.

Hicks (2003) reviewed the development of global educationtheory and practice over the last 30 years in the United Kingdom,Canada, and United States and identified four core elements thatall global education programs should address: (1) issuesdimensiondincluding issues such as inequality/equality, injustice/justice, conflict/peace, environmental damage/care, alienation/participation; (2) spatial dimensiondreferring to exploring local–global connections that exist in relation to these issues, includingthe nature of both interdependency and dependency; (3) temporaldimensiondexploring the interconnections that exist betweenpast, present and future in relation to such issues and in particularscenarios of preferred future; and (4) process dimensiondaparticipatory and experiential pedagogy which explores differingvalue perspectives and lead to politically aware local–global citi-zenship (p. 271).

Adding to the conceptual discourse about the purpose andmeaning of global education, there is a small, yet growing empiricalresearch base on teachers’ conceptualizations of the field as theyplan and teach from a global perspective (Gaudelli, 2003; Holden &Hicks, 2007; Merryfield, 1998; Myers, 2006; Pike, 2000). Forexample, Pike (2000) examined how classroom teachers fromCanada, United Kingdom, and the U.S. ascribed meaning to globaleducation and found that teachers from all three countries agreedon the importance of concepts such as interdependence, connect-edness, and shared the perception that global education goesbeyond acquisition of knowledge about the world to include skillsand attitudinal development. He also reported that whereasAmerican teachers are more likely to characterize global education

as learning about a constellation of discrete countries and cultures,British and Canadian teachers tend to speak in terms of intercon-nections between people and global systems and to address globalissues such as environmental programs, peace and conflict, andhealth in the developing world (Pike, 2000, p. 3).

Merryfield’s (1998) study of teachers with a variety of profes-sional background, including exemplary teachers, experiencedteachers, and preservice teachers provides in-depth information onU.S. teachers’ decision-making in regard to global education. Herstudy found that teachers in all groups agreed to ‘‘teach studentsabout their own cultures and diverse cultures through multipleperspectives and comparisons of both similarities and differencesso that students understand the complexity of culture anddemonstrate tolerance and respect for differences’’ (p. 152). It alsorevealed that exemplary global teachers planned and implementedtheir lessons around the theme of global interconnectedness butalso focused on global inequities in areas such as technology, healthcare, education, employment opportunities and income, civil andhuman rights, trade, distribution of capital, and other indicators ofpeoples’ and nations’ standard of living (p. 356). Merryfield furtherargued that studying teachers’ conceptual understanding of globaleducation informs both theory and practice.

Though above mentioned research has addressed perspectiveson global education held by practicing teachers, few work hasinvestigated the development of these perspectives, particularly, ifand how teacher education programs help with the development ofpreservice teachers’ perspectives on global education. Thus thequestion remains, how can teacher education program promote theidea of global education in ways that are meaningful to those whoare about to enter the profession?

In a teacher educator’s self-study, Kirkwood-Tucker (2004)examined the impact of using a United Nations (UN) simulation ina graduate course in global education on teacher educationstudents’ interpretations and integration of global issues. Her studyindicated that simulation in the UN General Assembly deliberationswere effective in developing teachers’ open-mindedness towardthose who are ethnically and culturally different, concerns forhuman rights, global stability, and peacebuilding competence.

Several studies have explored the impact of international fieldexperiences on US teacher candidates’ global learning. Drawingupon data sources such as candidates’ reflective journal entries,program evaluations, anecdotal notes, feedback from host countryeducators, and results from questionnaires or surveys, studies inthis area have highlighted the positive impact of internationalexperiences on preservice teachers, such as a shift in consciousnessand perspective, an empathetic understanding of the world and itspeople, an appreciation for other cultures and perspectives, and anawareness of both global and domestic diversity (Cushner &Brennan, 2007; Kambutu & Nganga, 2008; Pence & Macgillivray,2008; Spalding, Savage, & Garcia, 2007).

The study reported in this article falls in line with this trendtoward understanding the potential influence of teacher educationprograms and practices and responds to calls for more researchstudies on ways to improve teaching from a global perspective inteacher education. It examines the impact of integrating computer-mediated communication (CMC) technology into a social studiesmethods course on the development of preservice teachers’understanding of global education.

2.2. Social constructive learning and CMC in teacher education

This study also draws upon the theoretical principles of socialconstructivism, which view knowledge as primarily a culturalproduct, shaped by micro and macro-cultural influences andevolves through increasing participation within different commu-nities of practice. In contrast to traditional acquisition-oriented

Page 3: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625 619

learning model that emphasizes transmitting knowledge and skills,social constructivism conceptualizes learning as a collectiveparticipatory process of active knowledge construction thatunderscores context, interaction, and situatedness. Central to thistheoretical perspective is the belief that individual learning isembedded in social process and is mediated by participation ina social process of knowledge construction (Garrison, 1998; vonGlaserfeld, 1995; Windschitl, 2002). It involves the active creationand modification of thoughts, ideas, and understandings as theresult of experiences that occur within social–cultural contexts.

Due to its ability to support multiple representations of infor-mation, collaboration, communication, and generation and publicdisplay of knowledge, CMC is seen being particularly aligned withthe constructivist paradigm as opposed to previous computer-assisted instruction (Doolittle & Hicks, 2003; Romiszowski &Mason, 1996). It is believed that CMC technology brings thepotential to constitute new social arrangements, promote differentlearning interactions, facilitate knowledge construction, encouragecritical reflection, and therefore mediate and transform the expe-riences of teacher education students (Blanton, Moorman, &Trathen, 1998).

A number of studies that examine the impact of CMC projects onpreservice teachers’ professional learning are already in the litera-ture. A review of literature indicates that the technology has beenused to facilitate various teacher candidates’ learning in both fieldexperiences and course work, such as, (a) fostering interactionsbetween preservice teachers and students in K-12 classroomsthrough activities such as cyber-field placement and electronicmentors, (b) improving collaboration that enables prospectiveteachers to engage in public, joint construction of knowledge andreflective processes, (c) nurturing moral development and buildinga democratic community, (d) assisting meaningful discussion ofcontroversial and sensitive issues such as prejudice, privilege, anddiscrimination and increasing educational equity by changingpatterns of dominance and interaction, (e) increasing critical multi-cultural and global understanding among preservice teachers, and (f)extending teacher education students’ learning in their professionalfields, such as foreign language, literacy, science, social studies, andwriting (Harrington, 2002; Jetton, 2004; Lord & Lomicka, 2007;Merryfield, 2000, 2003; Mitchell, 2002; Schoorman, 2002; Trathen &Moorman, 2001; Wade, Fauske, & Thompson, 2008; Zong, 2002).

However, as the literature on CMC developed, the initial opti-mism regarding the potential of this new technology in facilitatingcross-cultural learning and understanding has been tempered bymore recent studies. Some researchers have noted that computer-mediated communication projects may have little impact on peo-ple’s misinformation and misperceptions. For example, Ware andKramsch (2005) described an extended episode of misunder-standing that occurred between a German female college studentand an American male college student discussing their versions ofrecent German history during an asynchronous telecollaborativeproject between learners of German in the United States andlearners of English in Germany. Merryfield (2000) also discussedthe paradoxes she had experienced while using electronic tech-nologies for multicultural and global education. She suggests thatmore studies, designed by researchers in both technology andmulticultural and global education across many contexts, areneeded to further explore the potential of electronic technologiesfor improving global aspect of teaching and learning.

3. Method

3.1. Understanding self-study

In the last two decades, there have been a growing number ofpublished research studies in teacher education that adopt a

self-study approach (Grossman, 2005; Loughran, 2007; Wade et al.,2008; Zeichner & Noffke, 2001). Dinkelman (2003) suggests thatself-study in teacher education has the potential to animate theidea of teaching as reflection, model an inquiry-based approach topedagogy, and generate rich understandings about promotingreflective practice. Zeichner (2007) calls upon teacher educatorsengaging in self-study to better situate the individual researchwithin programs of research in order to ‘‘contribute to theimprovement of teacher education practice and to our broaderknowledge about particular questions of significance to teachereducators and policy makers’’ (p. 43). This study responds to his callby situating the study in the larger research programs on improvingteachers’ global understanding and on integrating CMC technologyinto teacher education.

As is the case with many self-study research projects involvingteacher educators, the idea for this one emerged from the dailyclassroom-based needs. After teaching several semesters in thisnationally known teacher education program in the United States, Ilearned that most of my students came from communities that verylimited cross-cultural experiences existed. My uses of onlinetechnologies developed as part of my long term search for ways toincrease teachers’ learning from and interaction with peopledifferent from themselves and to increase their experientialunderstanding of global connections (Zong, 2005). The semesterafter September 11, 2001, my colleague and I were pondering newways to help our students understand the complexity of increasingglobal interactions and decided to incorporate InternationalEducation and Resource Network (iEARN) into our social studiesteacher education program.

3.2. The context and participants of the study

This study was conducted at a large public research university inthe southeastern part of the United States. The participants were 59preservice teachers in the university’s elementary teacher educa-tion program who were in their senior year and enrolled in a socialstudies methods course at the time of the study. Among the 59participants, 53 were female, 6 were male. All but only one wereWhite. Pseudonyms were used to protect the anonymity ofparticipants. The social studies methods course was a 3-hour,semester-long class designed to help teacher candidates develop asreflective practitioners in the field of social studies education. Itincludes critical analyses of a variety of objectives, instructionalresources and strategies, and assessment techniques in elementarysocial studies teaching. The readings, activities, and assignmentswere structured to challenge teacher candidates to think beyondthe local and immediate and to promote knowledge of people andplaces, events and issues that are national and international.

3.3. The computer-mediated communication project

The technology project examined in this study is known asInternational Education and Resource Network (iEARN) (www.iearn.org). As a non-for profit organization, iEARN createslearning opportunities connecting students and teachers from overa hundred countries through the Internet and other new commu-nication technologies. It uses a web-based threaded discussionformat to coordinate various discussion forums on cross-culturalunderstanding and global learning. The decision to integrate iEARNinto social studies methods course was based upon the parallel inobjectives between this online project and the course. As stated inthe organization’s constitution, the vision and purpose of iEARN areto ‘‘enable young people to undertake projects designed to makea meaningful contribution to the health and welfare of the planetand its people’’ (iEARN, 2007).

Page 4: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625620

The purpose of including iEARN assignment in the social studiesmethods course was to provide a medium for teacher candidates tobe familiar with effective ways of integrating CMC technology intoteaching and learning, as well as providing a cross-cultural expe-riential learning opportunity. Preservice teachers were expected tolog on to the website at least twice every week to engage discus-sions in various forums. Guidelines for online communication wereprovided and discussed at the beginning of the course. They laid outthe rationale and intent of the assignment and provided informa-tion on the strengths and limitations of CMC, rules of etiquette,expectations for professionalism, and information regarding issuesof confidentiality. In addition, the guidelines specified that partic-ipants be succinct and address the topic; draw on classroomreadings and discussions to support and provide evidence for ideas;and build on and respond to the ideas raised by other onlinediscussion participants. Throughout the semester, three in-classdebriefing sessions were organized to discuss the progress of theproject and to solicit preservice teachers’ informal reflections. Amore formal, collaborative reflection on the impact of the tech-nology assignment on preservice teachers’ understanding of globaleducation took place after the project’s completion when studentspresented their final reports.

The iEARN project reflects constructive learning in several ways.First, constructivist learning emphasizes meaningful, holisticlearning tasks and encourages viewing problems from multipleperspectives. The topics under discussion in iEARN, such as cross-cultural understanding, child labor, child soldier, poverty, peaceand violence, and empowering women are all real issues facingglobal society today. Internet communication with students andteachers from other countries allowed preservice teachers to beexposed to a variety of perspectives. Second, constructivist learningpromotes social construction of meaning. During iEARN discussionprocess, there were no ‘‘correct’’ answers or solutions to globalissues. The participating teachers and students from differentcountries constructed and exchanged ideas about possible solu-tions via CMC technology with peers around the world. Third,constructivist learning encourages active participation fromlearners. As the instructor of the course, I only played a facilitator’srole. From conducting background research, composing onlinemessages, debriefing, and writing final reports, the preserviceteachers actively engaged in the entire learning process.

3.4. Data sources and methods of analysis

In this self-study, I acted both as participant and researcher andemployed the interpretive paradigm using methods from culturalanthropology including prolonged engagement. Primary datasources were 59 preservice teachers’ iEARN final project reportscollected from three semesters. Each report consisted of onlinepostings to the electronic discussion forums the preservice teachermade, a reflective essay written at the conclusion of the technologyproject, and a world map with highlighted countries that theparticipant had interacted with during the electronic discussions.The guideline for the reflective essay was provided to help partic-ipants reflect upon the online communication experiences and howthose experiences had helped them learn about global educationand integration of technology into social studies teaching andlearning. Complementing the data from participants was my ownreflective journal, in which I made extensive notes about classdiscussions and my own reflections related to the iEARNassignment.

Over the three semesters when this study was conducted,preservice teachers were able to communicate with students andteachers from the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Azer-baijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan,Lebanon, Lithuania, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Romania,

Russia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Thailand,Uganda, and Zimbabwe. The discussion forums the preserviceteachers chose to participate were: change the world by commoneffort, child labor, child soldier, culture, dream school, feedingminds and fighting hunger, future teachers, heroes, local history,me and my pet, peace, peace through poetry, poverty, tolerance,and women in my country.

Data analysis emphasizes holistic descriptions and interpreta-tion of the social phenomenon created by online discussions andreflections. The primary goal was to provide as broad a presentationof participants’ understanding as possible. I employed the constantcomparative method (Strauss & Corbin, 1990) to identify anddevelop patterns and themes in preservice teachers’ understandingof global education. At the first level of analysis, generally known as‘‘open coding’’ stage, I read and coded all participants’ onlinemessages and reflection essays to identify major categories ofpreservice teachers’ thinking and compared data for similaritiesand differences. Strauss and Corbin (1990) cautioned that duringthis early stage of data analysis, the research ‘‘may come up withdozens, even hundreds of conceptual labels,’’ thus requiringanother stage of data analysis that leads to the discovery andnaming of new categories (p. 65). The categorization processinvolved the reexamination of the data that I had coded and labeledas I collapsed categories into themes.

The initial coding categories were derived from the conceptualliterature on global education. As the investigation unfolded, I alsoinductively identified emergent themes from the data as they werecollected, coded, and frequently reviewed. Through this constantcomparison of data, theoretical categories crystallized. Forexample, initially it seemed that there were five major perspectivesthat participants had expressed toward global education. However,further investigation clarified that some data did not easily fit intothese existing categories. Although data to support the develop-ment of an additional category were sparse, I felt that they weresignificant, and thus a sixth category emerged.

4. Results: preservice teachers’ perspectives onglobal education

The research findings are organized in two broad categories.First, I present the developing understanding of global educationamong the participants. I then discuss the components of thetechnology project that seemed to facilitate the development ofpreservice teachers’ understanding. Though not mutually exclusive,the participants’ conceptualizations of global education generallyfollow into six broad perspectives: cultural learning and under-standing, appreciating multiple perspectives and fostering toler-ance, addressing prevailing global issues, teaching about theconnections and collaborations among the nations, promotingpeace, and critical understanding of issues and events. Participantsreported that the online communication projects provided a uniqueopportunity to interact with people from various countries in anauthentic context.

4.1. Cultural learning and understanding

Among the 59 participants, 46 wrote about the importance ofcultural learning as the primary goal for global education. They sawglobal education as the means to teach students about the culturesand peoples of the world and emphasized that cultural learningshould be an essential part of education for every child in order tocounter the stereotypes and misunderstandings among peopleboth in the United States and around the world. As one of theparticipants stated, ‘‘Global education is a must to our world today,which is filled with such hate and violence. Let’s use culture tounite, not to divide.’’ Some spoke of their lack of cross-cultural

Page 5: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625 621

learning during earlier school years and their determination to helpfuture students to learn about, understand, and be respectful ofother cultures and beliefs. The following quote from a participant’sreflective essay exemplifies this perspective:

I was raised in a very non-diverse school and never exposed tomuch outside my hometown. My teachers never spoke aboutdifferences and often people around home used stereotypes todescribe someone who was different. I think teachers need tomake every effort to give students a global education so thatstudents are more aware of what is going on in countries aroundthe world. It is important that teachers provide children withaccurate and adequate information about cultures so thatstudents will be able to build on such knowledge to improveworldwide peace. (Stacey)

Preservice teachers also suggested that in order to achieve trueunderstanding, teaching and learning should engage cross-culturalcommunication, an idea similar to the concept of experientiallearning supported by scholars in the fields of global education andintercultural education (Cushner & Brennan, 2007; Merryfield,2002; Nieto, 2006; Wilson, 1982, 1998). One preservice teacherreflected upon her online communication experience in thediscussion forum on hunger:

I have found that globally, people have different perspectives onlife. However, what I found most interesting is that we all havecommon interests and misconceptions about one another.When I discussed some children in US living in poverty, peoplefrom Uganda responded in shock. It amazed me that peoplethink there is no poverty in US. I look at the rationale of globaleducation as a way to bridge communication of people aroundthe world. (Pam)

4.2. Appreciating multiple perspectives

Closely related to cultural learning, the second major perspec-tive expressed by preservice teachers on global education is toteach multiple perspectives and foster tolerance among peoples inthe world. Thirty-eight participants addressed the importance ofperspective consciousness, skills in perspective taking, and theability to look at an event or issue through the eyes of someonedifferent from oneself. They reflected upon how the computer-mediated discussion experiences had helped them become moreaware and appreciative of the complexity and various perspectiveson events such as US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and issueslike child labor in Pakistan. The following excerpt is one of the manyexamples in this perspective:

I thought it was especially important and informative to hearpeople’s opinions on some of the major issues, especially thewars in Afghanistan and in Iraq, which was very pertinent at thetime. I really enjoyed reading the thoughts of people in variouscountries concerning United States’ involvement in the wars.One of the overall themes I found from people in every countrywas just the desire for peace. iEARN helps me learn more aboutwhat is happening outside America. I feel that it is extremelyimportant for students to have different views of the world.(Cindy)

Another participant discussed how the technology experiencehad helped her develop new understanding about women in Iran:

The discussion that had the most impact on me was ‘‘Women inMy Country’’. A woman teacher from Iran was trying to clear upmisconceptions of women in her country. From reading herpostings and those responding to her, I learned that women inIran have opportunities to be independent and maintain

successful careers. I would have never imagined that, as hard asit is to admit. I feel many times we are far too uncomfortablewith people that look, speak, and dress differently from us thatwe never take the opportunity to find out about other culturesfirst hand. Rather than buying into whatever rumor that wehave heard, we should take the time to try and get to knowpeople. Ignorance of other cultures is what causes stereotypesand discrimination. (Kristina)

In this excerpt, the preservice teacher acknowledged explicitlythe stereotypical images she had about women in Iran and how thediscussion project had helped her reexamine her misconceptionsand motivated her to learn more about other cultures andperspectives. This change of thinking is significant, as Walker(2006) argued: ‘‘At the heart of international education lies theappreciation of differences, in the sense both of valuing diversityand of calling into previous unchallenged assumptions and preju-dices’’ (p. 47).

4.3. Addressing global issues

The third major theme emerged from data is that the preserviceteachers considered addressing global issues as an essential part ofglobal education. Twenty-eight participants talked about theimportance of teaching global issues and the role of teachers infacilitating students’ understanding of these issues. They discussedhow iEARN had made them more aware of various pressing chal-lenges facing today’s global society. The issues that generated mostdiscussion and reflection were the ones directly related to the well-beings of children, such as child labor, child soldier, poverty, envi-ronmental degradation, hunger, homelessness, refugees, war andviolence. Many participants reported that the communicationexperiences had helped them develop an ethic of caring (Noddings,2005) and a disposition to act to make positive changes. They wroteabout how they would like to make the world a better place for allchildren through teaching about global issues. One discussed herreaction to child soldiers in Sierra Leone:

The discussion forum concerning child soldiers really touchedme. I feel outraged that this is occurring and nothing is reallybeing done to help the situation. What should we teach aboutglobal education? We should teach our students about theworld because the problems that we are facing today do not justaffect a small number of people in some isolated parts of theworld but all of us globally. . Children need to be taught aboutthe problems with our world and how they can change them.(Jenni)

Another preservice teacher reflected upon her learning froma discussion forum on child labor:

I taught a lesson on child labor in Pakistan during practicum. Isaw a discussion forum on child labor and decided to post thereactions from lesson and the impact it had on the fifth gradestudents. During these discussions, I talked to people fromAustralia, Egypt, Pakistan, Uganda, and the United States. I hada special response from a high school student in Pakistan. Shecorrected my facts on the wages paid to children to enforcea greater impact on my students. I hope that we can educatepeople around the world about the serious issue of child labor.We need to support laws to restrict children from working andwe need to do it now and educate people about this inhumaneact!

The above quotes demonstrated preservice teachers’ developingawareness of and concerns for global issues. Scholars have long calledfor including these issues in school curriculum to develop students’knowledge of world conditions, or the ‘‘state-of-the-planet

Page 6: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625622

awareness’’ (Hanvey, 1976). In his review of global education theoryand practice in the last 30 years, Hicks (2003) identified issuedimension as the first of four core elements in global education.Reflections of participants in this study indicated that CMC experi-ences allowed preservice teachers to learn about global issues frompeople in those countries where the problems are still prevalent. Thisfirst-hand knowledge seemed to help motivate preservice teachers toteach more about these issues in their future classrooms.

4.4. Global connections and collaborations

The fourth perspective expressed by the participants on globaleducation is to teach connections among the nations and hownations should work together to solve the world problems. Thisperspective is similar to Hanvey’s (1976) notion of ‘‘knowledge ofglobal dynamics’’ and Hicks’ (2003) emphasis on explorations oflocal and global connections. Twenty-five participants discussed theimportance for students to understand economic and technologicalties and connections among different countries and how countriesshould work together to build a better world. They also explainedhow participation in iEARN discussions had helped them envisionthemselves as part of a global system where they can exchange ideasand make a difference. The following excerpt from one participant’swriting represents many preservice teachers’ thinking:

The iEARN project has exposed me to many aspects of interna-tional cultures and has prompted me to open my mind to theexperiences of people in other parts of the world. It has shownthat people are truly interconnected and interdependent. I nowrealize that the decisions I make in my daily life can affect othersin the areas of environment, politics, tolerance, and literacy.People will have to work together to develop solutions to globalproblems. Global education prepares students for the future,when they will have a life filled with global interdependence.Global education should focus on teaching global collaboration.(Kim)

4.5. Educating for peace

The fifth perspective teacher candidates held on global educationis about peace and tolerance. Fifteen participants emphasized therole of peace-building in global education and teachers’ responsi-bility in leading the effort. They discussed how iEARN participationin general and two peace related forums in particular had helpedthem realize the importance of ‘‘working together’’ in promotingpeace. They also suggest teachers should shoulder the responsibilityto discuss, model, and provide support for children to learn how tocommunicate and resolve conflicts peacefully. One wrote:

With everything going on in the world today, peace andunderstanding are important to not only talk about, but to teachas well. Anger and violence are things we all see everydayaround us, whether it is in our homes, on the streets, in ourcountry, or in our world. If we don’t directly see the violence, weview it on television. Children are constantly being exposed tothese feelings and actions. In order to promote peace and helpfuture generations, it is crucial that we teach our children howto resolve conflicts by listening and talking, not throughviolence. (Susan)

4.6. Critical understanding of global issues and events

This last perspective sees global education as a way to helpstudents develop critical understanding of world issues and events.Five participants expressed this view through online messages and

reflective essays. They discussed topics such as the increasing gapbetween the rich and the poor, the persistence of hunger andpoverty around the world, unequal access to technology, and theUS-led war in Iraq. One preservice teacher made the followingobservation of iEARN discussion forums: ‘‘Some of my peers in theUnited States have so much fun writing about their pets and theonly specific types of food they would use to feed their pets, whilechildren in many places in the world are too poor to own a pet.’’Another noted the contrasting situations of malnutrition in Africaand alarming rate of obesity in the United States and starteda round of discussions titled ‘‘Why Hunger?’’ Several preserviceteachers joined the discussion by exploring the issues of foodproduction, food distribution, and the increasing loss of farmlanddue to overdevelopment.

Although there were only five participants expressing thiscritical understanding of global education, the theme is significantto this study. As Merryfield (2002) suggested, it is time for educa-tors to challenge the implicit assumptions about globalizationunderlying traditional literature on global education and to movethe center of the field to the complexity of human interactions.Others also call upon educators to critically examine the cultural,social, and environmental consequences of globalization, addressincreasingly widening technology divide, and to build a curriculumthat resists reinforcing special historical privilege and attempts toaccord all human beings’ voice (Noddings, 2005; Wilson, 1998).

4.7. Advantages of computer medicated communication

As a self-study, part of my goal was to better understand thetechnology project and to improve teaching. It is important toexamine specific aspects of the technology assignment that seemedto influence preservice teachers’ understanding of the rationale andpurpose of global education. Participants’ reflections and discus-sions indicated that four aspects of CMC project had emerged as keyto facilitate global learning. First, the computer supported iEARNdiscussion forums provided worldwide access to people’s ideas andperspectives. Second, online discussions provided an authenticcontext to learn about cultures, issues, peoples, places, andperspectives. Third, the learning process was interactive and thecommunication was multidimensional. Fourth, the technologyallowed preservice teachers’ own voices and thoughts being heardand published.

Most participants compared the online discussion experienceswith traditional curriculum format. They emphasize CMC tech-nology’s authentic, personal, and interactive nature as an importantresource to teach about the world and its people. Others wroteabout the excitement of being heard and responded by students orteachers from other countries. For example, one participant wrote:‘‘I think one of the best benefits of this project is that there is realinteraction with real people. It makes opinions and ideas mean-ingful. Participation in the iEARN project has a purpose and a realaudience other than the teacher.’’ Another participant echoed thesimilar view, ‘‘iEARN allows personal accounts of situations. Thecitizens’ perspectives of their country are much more valuable thana textbook summary.’’

5. Discussion and implications

Teacher educators worldwide are continually seeking effectivepedagogical strategies for preparing teachers to teach in a worldthat is becoming increasingly interdependent (Cushner & Brennan,2007; Kambutu & Nganga, 2008; Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004; Merry-field & Wilson, 2005). This study examines the impact of partici-pation in a computer-mediated multinational communicationproject on the development of preservice teachers’ understandingof global education. The results suggest that the technology

Page 7: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625 623

experiences appear to have facilitated a deeper level of globalawareness among the participants. Their expressed interests inteaching cross-cultural understanding, children’ rights and welfare,hunger and poverty, peace and conflict resolution, global connec-tions and collaborations reflect essential elements of a globaleducation framework grounded in perspective consciousness andinterconnectedness of global issues (Hicks, 2003; Merryfield, 1998).Preservice teachers identified the role of CMC technology in facil-itating global understanding as providing worldwide access todifferent ideas and perspectives, authentic learning experiences,interactive learning environment, meaningful dialogue, and sup-porting public voices.

Considering the findings of this research, several issues warrantdiscussion. First, the results of this study confirm those fromprevious research on prospective and practicing teachers’ concep-tions of global education in the United States, which emphasize theprimacy of culture studies (Merryfield, 1998; Myers, 2006; Pike,2000). The majority of the participants in this study believed globaleducation first and foremost should teach students about diversecultures around the world. Those preservice teachers who grew upfrom homogeneous communities particularly saw the critical roleschools can play in helping students overcome ethnocentrism andparochialism.

Along with emphasis on studying world cultures, preserviceteachers also stressed the importance of appreciation for multipleperspectives and respect for differences. They emphasized that thestudents of global age need ‘‘knowledge and appreciation ofmultiple perspectives, multiple realities, and conflicting viewpointson issues, events, and people under study’’ (Merryfield, 1998, p.152). In addition, preservice teachers agreed that global educationdiffers from the traditional approach to world study by presentingthe perspectives of ordinary people from the countries or regionsbeing studied. They suggested that effective global learning tookplace when interacting with and learning from people from othercountries and placed considerable emphasis on the importance ofcommunication and dialogue in bridging cross-culturalunderstanding.

Second, the findings of this study reveal that the preserviceteachers’ conceptions of global education also include addressingprevailing global issues, particularly issues that directly affectchildren’s physical, social, and emotional health. Participants in thisstudy passionately discussed the urgent need for school curriculumto address issues such as child labor, child soldier, hunger, home-lessness, poverty, war, and violence. They also expressed theirdetermination to teach these topics in future classrooms. Previousresearch indicated that global teaching in the United States tendedto focus on culture learning with inadequate attention to globalissues and injustice (Myers, 2006; Pike, 2000). The data presentedin this study suggest that the computer-mediated multinationaldiscussion projects like iEARN may have helped to alleviate thoseconcerns and constraints. The communication experience, I wouldargue, seemed to provide a unique authentic learning environmentfor preservice teachers to learn about these global issues, toexamine their social and economic roots, and to discuss possiblesolutions. The communication and discussion process also createda special learning community that enabled these teacher candi-dates to voice their concerns for and interests in these issues withteachers and students who are directly or indirectly affected bythem on a daily basis.

Finally, while the CMC technology had successfully helped mostpreservice teachers develop perspective consciousness andconcern for pressing global problems, it had limited impact on theircritical understanding of events and issues such as globalization,the gap between the rich and the poor, the role of US foreign policyin the world, and the worldwide unequal access to technology. Thefact that only five participants were able to demonstrate critical

elements of global understanding made me realize that the onlinediscussion project was insufficient to engage most teacher candi-dates in broaching the topics that require critical thinking. Sincea major goal of the course was to help teacher candidates criticallyexamine the methods and materials related to social studiesteaching, this limitation is an important one. I can very much relateto Fabos and Young’s (1999) call for a broader analysis of tele-communication use in education, a critical awareness of thecomplex economic and political influences behind the technology,and a better understanding as how computer supported commu-nication can be used to the best of its potential.

Why was it so difficult to develop teacher candidates’ criticalunderstanding? One explanation may be that most iEARN discus-sion forums are designed specifically for students from kinder-garten to high school level and tend to celebrate cultures, highlightglobal collaborations, and avoid controversial topics and issues.Another reason is that many preservice teachers were reluctant todiscuss topics they perceive as divisive in the United States. Asother research studies have indicated, social studies teachers in theUnited States are generally reluctant to address controversial issues(Kirkwood-Tucker, 2004; Myers, 2006). In this study, most preser-vice teachers also stated that they preferred light hearted topicssuch as ‘‘Culture’’, ‘‘Me and My Pets’’, ‘‘My Dream School’’ overcontentious ones such as the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.They tend to view the computer-mediated multinational discussionas a type of interesting and somewhat casual storytelling, ratherthan as an opportunity to examine and question their own beliefsand visions of the world.

In addition, other studies have also demonstrated that CMCtechnology would not automatically promote critical thinking thatthe teacher educators had planned (Wade et al., 2008; Whipp,2003). As Whipp (2003) suggested, teacher educators need to takespecial steps to scaffold critical reflection in online discussionprojects. Within the literature on electronic discussion acrosscultures and countries, it is also found that contact in synchronousand asynchronous communication may not necessarily lead toglobal learning and sometimes even have little impact on people’smisinformation and misperceptions (Merryfield, 2000; Ware &Kramsch, 2005). Teacher involvement, far from being peripheral inonline learning, has been made even more important in computer-mediated discourses to facilitate interaction and communicationacross cultural, geographical, institutional, and sometimeslinguistic lines (Belz & Muller-Hartmann, 2003).

Clearly, it is not enough to simply connect teacher candidates inonline communication project. The computer-mediated multina-tional discussion program by itself is not sufficient for powerfulglobal learning. We see two other components as critical. First,more structured discussion forums need to be designed and facil-itated in order to help future teachers develop competencies to notonly understand global education in cultural terms but also analyzeissues around globalization from a social justice lens. Second,thoughtfully guided debriefing and reflection are needed to ensurean effective computer-mediated discussion program that enhancesglobal understanding. More in-class debriefing sessions need to beorganized to engage teacher candidates in explicitly questioningtheir prior assumptions and understanding their experiences in thelarger context of the global community.

Reflection on this self-study also led to insights for my ownpractice. As many teacher educators who are teaching froma progressive manner, in designing this global learning experience,I struggled with several ever-present challenges and dilemmassuch as structure, content, process, and assessment. The mainchallenge associated with such a project is the time and energyspent in monitoring the correspondence and guiding students’efforts. Another major challenge is response time. There werelapses of days between the time the preservice teachers posted

Page 8: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625624

messages and the time they received responses from other coun-tries. Participants noted in their reflections that this lapse ofresponse time was frustrating because it hinders meaningfulexchanges of ideas.

It should be noted that there were several limitations that mayhave affected the findings of this study. First, the particular onlinecommunication project was a relatively isolated, short-term eventin preservice teachers’ experience in the teacher educationprogram. Meanwhile, the preservice teachers’ conceptual under-standing of global education was not bound by the same real andperceived constraints which practicing teachers face. Perhaps theirenthusiasm for the project would wane in the long run. Futureresearch is strongly recommended to follow preservice teachersinto their classroom practice to examine the sustainable nature oftechnology’s impact.

Recognizing the limiting effects of previously mentionedconcerns, this study illuminates how CMC technology can beintegrated into teacher education to improve teachers’ globallearning. The findings of this work have significance for the field ofglobal education as well as for integration of Internet-based tech-nology into teacher education. It is common to hear that the worldis more interdependent than ever, and easy to find examples of thisin international economics and politics. Yet, whatever businessesand governments may be doing, there is still a great distancebetween the peoples of the world. Ignorance about other countriesand cultures is widespread almost everywhere. Successful imple-mentation of global perspectives in education depends uponclassroom teachers. It is important to examine the teachers’perspectives and the development of those important perspectives.

This study provides empirical evidence on using computer-mediated communication technology to create an experientiallearning experience for future teachers to engage in teaching andunderstanding about the world. The findings indicate that CMCprojects such as iEARN hold promise for facilitating global learningin a number of ways. The rapid growth of Internet-based commu-nication in both university and school classrooms makes studies ofthis nature very important in shedding light on teaching andlearning that integrate the use of CMC technology. More researchstudies are urgently needed in this much under-explored field.

References

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE). (1994). Teachereducation in global and international education. Washington, DC: Author.

Anderson, L. F. (1991). A rationale for global education. In K. A. Tye (Ed.), Globaleducation: From thought to action (pp. 13–34). Alexandria, VA: The Associationfor Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Belz, J. A., & Muller-Hartmann, A. (2003). Teachers as intercultural learners: nego-tiating German–American telecollaboration along the institutional fault line.Modern Language Journal, 87, 71–89.

Blanton, W., Moorman, G., & Trathen, W. (1998). Telecommunications and teachereducation: a constructive review. In P. D. Pearson, & A. Iran-Nejad (Eds.), Reviewof research in education (pp. 235–276). Washington, DC: AERA.

Case, R. (1993). Key elements of a global perspective. Social Education, 57, 318–325.Cochran-Smith, M., Feiman-Nemser, S., McIntyre, D., & Demers, K. (2008). Handbook

of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts. NewYork, NY: Routledge.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Studying teacher education: The report ofthe AERA panel on research and teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cushner, K., & Brennan, S. (2007). Intercultural student teaching: A bridge to globalcompetence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Dinkelman, T. (2003). Self-study in teaching education: a means and ends tools forpromoting reflective teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 6–18.

Doolittle, P., & Hicks, D. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for theuse of technology in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education,31(1), 72–104.

Dunn, R. (2002). Growing good citizens with a world-centered curriculum. Educa-tional Leadership, 59(10), 10–13.

Fabos, B., & Young, M. D. (1999). Telecommunications in the classroom: rhetoricversus reality. Review of Educational Research, 69(3), 217–259.

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: a brief history of the 21st century. New York:Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

Garrison, J. (1998). Towards a pragmatic social constructivism. In M. Larochelle,N. Bednarz, & J. Garrison (Eds.), Constructivism and education (pp. 43–60).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge.

Gaudelli, W. (2003). World class: Teaching and learning in global times. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.

von Glaserfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. P. Steffe, &J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 3–16). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Grossman, P. (2005). Research on pedagogical approaches to teacher education. InM. Cochran-Smith, & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education (pp. 425–476). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. Denver: Center for TeachingInternational Relations. (Reprinted 1982 as a pamphlet by Global Perspectivesin Education, Inc., New York).

Harrington, H. (2002). Using computer conferencing to foster and assess prospec-tive teachers’ moral sensitivity. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,10(3), 323–342.

Hicks, D. (2003). Thirty years of global education: a reminder of key principles andprecedents. Educational Review, 55(3), 265–275.

Hicks, D., & Holden, C. (2007). Teaching the global dimension: Key principles andeffective practice. NY: Routledge.

Holden, C., & Hicks, D. (2007). Making global connections: the knowledge, under-standing and motivation of trainee teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education,23(1), 13–23.

International Education and Resource Network (iEARN). (2007). What is iEARN?.http://www.iearn.org/about/index.html. Accessed 18.03.07.

Jetton, T. (2004). Using computer-mediated discussion to facilitate preserviceteachers’ understanding of literacy assessment and instruction. Journal ofResearch on Technology in Education, 36(2), 171–189.

Kambutu, J., & Nganga, L. (2008). In these uncertain times: educators build culturalawareness through planned international experiences. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 24, 939–951.

Kirkwood-Tucker, T. F. (2004). Empowering teachers to create a more peacefulworld through global education: simulating the United Nations. Theory andResearch in Social Education, 32(1), 56–74.

Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2007). Foreign language teacher preparation and asyn-chronous CMC: promoting reflective teaching. Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 15(4), 513–516.

Loughran, J. (2007). Research teacher education practices: responding to the chal-lenges, demands, and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education,58(1), 12–20.

Merryfield, M. (1997). A framework for teacher education in global perspectives. InM. Merryfield, E. Jarchow, & S. Pickert (Eds.), Preparing teachers to teach globalperspectives: A handbook for teacher education (pp. 1–24). Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.

Merryfield, M. (1998). Pedagogy for global perspectives in education: studies ofteachers’ thinking and practice. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26,342–369.

Merryfield, M. (2000). Using electronic technologies to promote equity and culturaldiversity in social studies and global education. Theory and Research in SocialEducation, 28, 502–526.

Merryfield, M. (2002). Rethinking our framework for understanding the world.Theory and Research in Social Education, 30, 148–151.

Merryfield, M. (2003). Like a veil: cross-cultural experiential learning online.Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(2), 146–171.

Merryfield, M., & Wilson, A. (2005). Social studies and the world: Teaching globalperspectives. Washington, DC: NCSS.

Mitchell, J. (2002). Online writing: a link to learning in a teacher educationprogram. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 127–134.

Myers, J. (2006). Rethinking the socials studies curriculum in the context of glob-alization: education for global citizenship in the U.S. Theory and Research inSocial Education, 34(3), 370–394.

National Council for the Social Studies. (2001). Preparing citizens for a globalcommunity. http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/global. Accessed 18.06.07.

Nieto, N. (2006). Cultural plunge: cultural immersion as a means of promoting self-awareness and cultural sensitivity among student teachers. Teacher EducationQuarterly, 33(1), 12–26.

Noddings, N. (2005). Educating citizens for global awareness. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press.

Parker, W., Ninomiya, A., & Cogan, J. (1999). Educating world citizens: towardmultinational curriculum development. American Educational Research Journal,36, 117–145.

Pence, H., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experi-ence on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 14–25.

Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: in pursuit of meaning.Theory Into Practice, 39, 64–74.

Quezada, R., & Cordeiro, P. (2007). Guest editors’ introduction: internationalizingschools and college of education educating teachers for global awareness.Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 3–7.

Romiszowski, A. J., & Mason, R. (1996). Computer-mediated communication. InD. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications andtechnology (pp. 438–456). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Schoorman, D. (2002). Increasing critical multicultural understanding via tech-nology: ‘‘Teachable Moments’’ in a university-school partnership project.Journal of Teaching Education, 53(4), 356–369.

Shapiro, H., & Purpel, D. (Eds.). (2005). Critical issues in American education:Democracy and meaning in a globalizing world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Page 9: Developing preservice teachers' global understanding through computer-mediated communication technology

G. Zong / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 617–625 625

Spalding, E., Savage, T., & Garcia, J. (2007). The March of Remembrance and Hope:teaching and learning about diversity and social justice through the Holocaust.Teachers College Record, 109, 1423–1456.

Stewart, V. (2007). Becoming citizens of the world. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 8–14.Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory

procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Trathen, W., & Moorman, G. (2001). Using e-mail to create pedagogical dialogue in

teacher education. Reading Research and Instruction, 40, 203–224.Tucker, J. L., & Cistone, P. (1991). Global perspectives for teachers: an urgent priority.

Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 3–10.Tye, K. (1999). Global education: A worldwide movement. Orange, CA: Independent

Press.Wade, S., Fauske, J., & Thompson, A. (2008). Prospective teachers’ problem solving

in on-line peer-led dialogues. American Educational Research Journal, 45(2),398–442.

Walker, G. (2006). Educating the global citizen. Saxmundham Suffolk: John CattEducational.

Ware, P., & Kramsch, C. (2005). Toward an intercultural stance: teaching German andEnglish through telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 190–205.

Whipp, J. (2003). Scaffolding critical reflection in online discussions: helpingprospective teachers think deeply about filed experiences in urban schools.Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 321–333.

Wilson, A. (1982). Cross-cultural experiential learning for teachers. Theory intoPractice, 21(3), 184–192.

Wilson, A. (1998). Oburoni outside the whale: reflections on an experience inGhana. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26, 410–429.

Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation ofdilemmas: an analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and politicalchallenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175.

Zeichner, K. (2007). Accumulating knowledge across self-studies in teachereducation. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 36–46.

Zeichner, K., & Noffke, S. (2001). Practitioner research. In V. Richardson (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). (pp. 314–330) Washington, DC:American Educational Research Association.

Zong, G. (2002). Can computer mediated communication help to prepare globalteachers? An analysis of preservice social studies teachers’ experience. Theoryand Research in Social Education, 30(4), 589–616.

Zong, G. (2005). Road less traveled: an Asian woman immigrant faculty’s experiencepracticing global pedagogy in American teacher education. In G. Li, & Beckett.(Eds.), ‘‘Strangers’’ of the academy: Asian women scholars in higher education (pp.251–265). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Zong, G., Wilson, A., & Quashigah, Y. (2008). Global education. In L. Levstik, &C. Tyson (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 197–216).New York, NY: Routledge.