Teacher educators’ pedagogical practices in global citizenship education using the soft vs critical GCE framework

Abstract In a critical review of the South African government’s Minimum Requirements for Teacher Education Qualifications (MRTEQ), designed to provide a foundation for teacher education institutions, a stark deficiency emerges in terms of critical Global Citizenship Education (GCE). This paper thus aims to investigate the underpinnings guiding teacher educators’ pedagogical practices in developing the capacities their students require for a critical GCE. A case study research design guided by an interpretative paradigm was used. Semi-structured online interviews were conducted among nine teacher educators at a university in South Africa. The adoption of a case study design with a small sample size restricts the generalisability of the findings. The researcher acknowledges this limitation; however, this study was of an explanatory nature, with the objective of gaining in-depth knowledge of the teacher educators’ reactions to the interview questions, rather than aiming to generalise the findings. The study establishes a compelling link between teacher educators’ familiarity/understanding with GCE, curriculum integration, and the use of technology in the development of globally-minded, critically-thinking citizens. The findings suggest that the majority of university educators favoured soft GCE approaches, whereas a sizable minority embraced crucial GCE qualities. The findings further confirm that when technology is used in the classroom, it helps students work together and think critically, which leads to a significant rise in student autonomy. However, the research reveals significant barriers, such as a lack of technology, a predominant focus on content over meaningful dialogue, and the implications of using either a soft or critical GCE approach. These results underscore the need for addressing these challenges to effectively facilitate respectful discussions and cultivate critical global citizenship in students.


Introduction
Global citizenship education (GCE) forms an important part of the conversation about decolonising higher education curricula in a developing country such as South Africa.Curriculum developers see GCE as a foundational attempt to cultivate in students the values and knowledge they need for developing critical capacities to scrutinise the economic, social, and political inequities that perpetuate a neoliberal agenda (Bosio, 2021).However, meaningful integration of GCE into the (higher) education systems of many countries, including South Africa, remains elusive (Tsegay & Bekoe, 2020).
The South African government's Manifesto on Values, Education, and Democracy lists the ten communal values to be fostered: democracy, social justice and equity, equality, non-racism and non-sexism, Ubuntu, an open society, accountability, the rule of law, respect, and reconciliation (Department of Education, 2001).While these values appear to resonate strongly with a critical GCE (Waghid, 2018), the problem at hand is the absence of a specific critical GCE within the South African Department of Higher Education and Training's (2015) Minimum Requirements for Teacher Education Qualifications policy (MRTEQ).Despite the MRTEQ's purported purpose of providing teacher education institutions with a foundational framework for developing teacher education qualifications, it falls short in addressing the essential elements of critical GCE.This glaring gap exposes a significant deficiency in the cultivation of the necessary knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required to empower pre-service teachers to effectively challenge negative selfperceptions and nurture their capacity to serve as positive role models.The research conducted by Komba and Nkumbi (2008), Prinsloo (2007), Sanyal (2013), and Tsegay and Bekoe (2020) reinforces the urgency of rectifying this issue, emphasising the pressing need to bridge this gap and promote critical GCE among South African pre-service teachers.Rapoport (2020) reports on research on a methodological approach in a number of fields of education, including GCE, which elaborates on the role of technology in addition to mediation and teacher agency.In conversations about human rights, poverty, inequality, or environmental and social justice, technology continues to redefine how people interact online.However, it cannot be claimed that GCE, and, more specifically, its connection to technology (the "Fourth Industrial Revolution (4iR)"), are either progressive or mutually beneficial (Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).To critically evaluate this assertion, it becomes imperative to conduct a comprehensive examination of teacher educators' pedagogical approaches towards pre-service teachers.This scrutiny is essential to ensure that their practices are effectively aligned with the latest educational advancements in a digitised society.Such alignment holds significance not only for universities in the Global South but also within the specific context of this study.By conducting this thorough review, a clearer understanding can be obtained regarding the extent to which pedagogical practices support the needs of a digitised society and contribute to the advancement of education in the Global South.
This study aims to address critical gaps in the existing literature regarding the advancement of critical GCE through the use of educational technology, particularly within the Global South.Whilst Andreotti and Pashby (2013) present individual cases from the Global North that demonstrate practices promoting critical GCE with the aid of educational technology, a comprehensive review of the literature reveals a scarcity of empirical research in the Global South exploring current pedagogical practices supported by educational technology in the context of advancing critical GCE (Goren & Yemini, 2017).Only two studies have been examined in a systematic review of empirical research on GCE undertaken by Goren and Yemini (2017) within the African environment.Quaynor (2015) focuses on GCE and citizenship education in post-conflict Liberia, whilst Edge and Khamsi (2012) conducted a comparative study on learners' views of international partnerships in U.K. and African schools.According to both studies, the significant motivators for introducing GCE in Africa are the promotion of human rights, global responsibility, offering hope for disadvantaged students, and helping them develop their voices (Goren & Yemini, 2017).By addressing the limited empirical research on pedagogical practices supported by educational technology in the Global South and their role in advancing critical GCE, this study aims to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of GCE within this context.
Against this backdrop, situated within a South African university, the researcher undertakes an exploration of the fundamental principles, ideas, beliefs, and concepts that underpin teacher educators' pedagogical practices.The aim is to examine how these practices contribute to the development of the essential capacities needed by students for critical GCE.Andreotti (2006) argues that while "soft" GCE may find relevance in specific contexts, educators run the risk of inadvertently reinforcing the very systems of thought and patterns of behaviour they seek to dismantle in their students if they neglect to critically evaluate the assumptions and implications/limitations of their chosen methods.To assess the alignment of sampled teacher educators' pedagogical practices with the objectives of critical GCE, the researcher adopts Andreotti's (2006) Soft versus Critical GCE framework as a conceptual lens.In this study, the original framework is specifically framed and divided into five underlying themes.The researcher anticipates that this modified framework may prove valuable for researchers undertaking similar investigations.Furthermore, given the scarcity of empirical research on pedagogical practices employing the original Soft versus Critical GCE framework within the South African higher education context, this study emerges as both pertinent and timely.
The study aims to respond to the following questions: • R.Q. 1: How do teacher educators at a South African university conceptualise GCE?
• R.Q. 2: How do the teacher educators at the South African university utilise educational technology in their pedagogical practices to simultaneously facilitate the "soft" and "critical" aspects of GCE, aiming towards the achievement of specific GCE goals?
• R.Q. 3: What challenges do the teacher educators perceive when incorporating GCE into their teaching practices in their respective disciplines?
The significance of these research questions encompasses three essential aspects.Firstly, the initial question holds the potential to enlighten interventions targeting the enhancement of GCE in the Global South.Secondly, the subsequent question possesses the capacity to add value to the development of teacher training programmes, ensuring their effectiveness is heightened.The third question presents an opportunity to bolster GCE outcomes by providing valuable support to teacher educators in the Global South.Andreotti (2006) developed the Soft vs Critical GCE framework, drawing on the original thoughts of Dobson (2005Dobson ( , 2006) ) and Spivak (1988Spivak ( , 1990Spivak ( , 2003)).The framework was created to distinguish between different GCE approaches and investigate the assumptions driving global interconnectedness.The framework serves two purposes.First, it identifies approaches based on individual humanism that perpetuate historical global interrelated processes (including neoliberal and social justice perspectives) (Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).Second, it critically examines these beliefs regarding global interconnectedness to change their relationships significantly (Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).Thus, while soft GCE seeks to strengthen existing relationships between people and countries by promoting individual efforts to solve global issues through market-driven solutions or social justice initiatives, critical GCE seeks to challenge and transform these relationships by examining underlying assumptions and addressing systemic problems (Andreotti, 2006;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).The researcher further grouped the dimensions of Andreotti's (2006) original framework into five categories: identifying the problem, an ethics of care, transformative change, degree of empowerment, and degree of conflict.

Soft vs critical GCE framework
Certain social cartographies, such as HEADS UP, HOUSE, TREE, and EARTHCARE, have been researched further in order to contribute to various conversations about global justice and education (Andreotti et al., 2018).These methods are more pedagogical than prescriptive to realise that current strategies for addressing global justice and social change need to be revised to equip society to confront these unpredictable times (Andreotti et al., 2018).These approaches have their foundations in a critical GCE framework to empower students and educators to work alongside and navigate the complexities, unpredictability, paradoxes, and complicities that characterise efforts to address unprecedented global challenges (Andreotti et al., 2018).Torres and Bosio (2020) contend that GCE should function as a kind of problem-posing education that encourages students to exercise critical thought.Andreotti's (2006) clear description of the problem includes its characteristics and justifications for privileges.These the researcher particularly categorised using the framework as "Identifying the problem".

Soft GCE: identifying the problem as poverty
Soft GCE understands a problem's nature may presuppose a lack of economic development: the basic premise of the problem may be poverty (Andreotti, 2006).In the Global North, for example, the idea that developed nations generate measurable economic development or use resources efficiently underpins another argument for such positions of power (Andreotti, 2006;Dobson, 2005Dobson, , 2006)).

Critical GCE: identifying the problem as injustice
The nature of such a problem, according to critical GCE, is underpinned by the asymmetrical power relations that create and maintain economic exploitation, which assumes the problem is injustice or inequality (Andreotti, 2006;Dobson, 2005Dobson, , 2006;;Spivak, 2003Spivak, , 2004)).According to a critical GCE perspective, the justification for privileged positions, for instance, in the Global North, is that these profit from and maintain control over existing violent and unjust structures (Andreotti, 2006;Dobson, 2005Dobson, , 2006;;Spivak, 2003Spivak, , 2004)).Andreotti (2006) lays out the foundation for caring, justification for doing, and comprehension of interconnectedness, which the researcher categorised under an "ethics of care".

Soft GCE: an ethics of care as a responsibility towards educating the 'other'
According to Soft GCE, the essence of care resides in our imperative to educate others, which is commonly interpreted as our responsibility towards them (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).This perspective on "care" has additional ramifications, which extends to its justification for action.In this regard, Soft GCE emphasises normative principles for thinking and doing (Andreotti, 2006).
These governing principles for action within both Soft and Critical GCE frameworks also affect the awareness of the interdependence between individuals and societies.Specifically, Soft GCE presupposes an equal environment of interconnectedness, where everyone shares the same objectives and abilities, symbolising global unity (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).Bosio (2021) describes an ethics of care as the foundation of Critical GCE, which nurtures compassion and safeguards human rights.In order to enhance social justice and sustainability for all communities, educators must approach GCE in a manner that nurtures the heart of the learner (Torres & Bosio, 2020).Critical GCE accomplishes this by cultivating accountability, in which individuals learn to be responsible to others and to learn alongside them (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).

Critical GCE: an ethics of care as accountability to and with 'others'
According to Andreotti (2006), Critical GCE places a strong emphasis on normative relationship principles, resulting in an emphasis on political and ethical considerations.It acknowledges the unequal power dynamics inherent to globalisation, contending that Global North/South elites frequently impose their assumptions as universally accepted principles (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
In order to adhere to an ethics of care, Critical GCE educators must integrate ethical principles into their curricula and instruction, with a focus on political and social values.Bosio and Waghid (2022) suggest that educators should promote active involvement in real-world issues to advance peace, justice, and equality.They argue that an ethically grounded critique of GCE can emphasise the injustices of globalisation and prompt an examination of power imbalances that exacerbate the North-South divide, thereby permitting global injustice to persist (Waghid, 2023).

Transformative change
Meaningful change, according to Andreotti (2006), entails the specifics of what must change, the goals of change, the participation of "ordinary" people, the behaviours of individuals, and the manner in which change must occur.

Soft GCE: Catalysing change through external transformations
Soft GCE views change as a process requiring the destabilisation of development-stifling structures, institutions, and people.It argues for altering such elements to bring about real societal change (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).Soft GCE hinges on an unwavering commitment to promoting equitable development, peace, tolerance, and equality.Soft GCE aspires to create a society where these values are not only ideas but also intrinsic facets of daily life (Andreotti, 2006).Within this perspective, Soft GCE sees select people as contributing to the issue while recognising regular citizens as critical partners in developing solutions.This problem-solving process often entails the disruption of existing institutions, highlighting the transformational power of collective action (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).Soft GCE values individuals who foster revolutionary efforts.Individuals may help push social change by volunteering their time, skill, and resources to initiatives focused on at dismantling entrenched structures (Andreotti, 2006).
Soft GCE, which operates on a universalist concept of change, presents an aspirational paradigm of how humans should live and what they should aim for (Andreotti, 2006;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).This viewpoint encourages a coordinated response to global concerns by emphasising a shared vision of humanity (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).Finally, Soft GCE regards forced change as an essential method for driving transformation.Significant change is unlikely to occur without external provocation or involvement (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
Critical GCE, like Soft GCE, recognises people's agency and responsibility in producing revolutionary change.It does, however, emphasise a broader sense of obligation (Andreotti, 2006).It asserts that everyone is a part of the problem and the solution, thus emphasising a shared responsibility for bringing about critical changes (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).It enables people to examine their situations and actively alter their surroundings.This entails changing institutions, mindsets, beliefs, personal identities and power dynamics in order to create a more equitable and inclusive environment (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).

Degree of empowerment
The researcher developed this theme in accordance with Andreotti's (2006) framework, one which discusses the goals, strategies, and potential benefits of GCE.

Soft GCE: Promoting predetermined ideals and raising global consciousness
Soft GCE is premised on directing people towards living an "ideal life" as defined by specified societal ideals or norms.According to Andreotti (2006), this perspective expresses the assumption that conforming to these previously determined principles improves one's quality of life.Soft GCE employs techniques geared toward increasing the public's understanding of global concerns (Andreotti, 2006;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).It advocates for campaigns that raise awareness of these issues and encourages community involvement in resolving them (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
According to Andreotti (2006), soft GCE has several potential benefits.It encourages more engagement in public awareness efforts, resulting in a more educated and involved citizenry.It also mobilises resources to aid those in need, emphasising the need for shared solidarity in fostering equitable growth and development.These initiatives have a more significant influence than individual beneficiaries, contributing to social change (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
The benefits of Critical GCE are most seen in the development of critical thinking abilities, which leads to better informed, ethical, and responsible action.Critical GCE cultivates a generation of citizens more suited to manage the intricacies of our linked world by cultivating a deeper knowledge of global challenges and encouraging active involvement in tackling them (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).

Degree of conflict
Soft and critical GCE approaches have benefits and drawbacks.

Soft GCE: Reinforcement of unequal power relations and its implications
Soft GCE, although valuable in several capacities, may unintentionally reinforce colonial beliefs and connections, promote a feeling of cultural supremacy and privilege, and generate a somewhat detached, uncritical attitude (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).The approach's predisposition to avoid challenging and sensitive subjects could assist with maintaining a smooth classroom dynamic, but it can also restrict profound, transformational learning (Pathak-Shelat & Bhatia, 2022).

Critical GCE: Internal conflict and perceptions of despair
Critical GCE demands meticulous preparation for its implementation, particularly when enabling a culturally diverse cohort of students through emotional processes of pain, anger, guilt, confusion, and eventual reconciliation (Pathak-Shelat & Bhatia, 2022, p. 102).Without such rigorous preparation, critical GCE may fall short of its noble aim of promoting global justice and equality (Pathak-Shelat & Bhatia, 2022).
The researcher considers "the problem" to be the framework's main tenet.Identifying the problem can help one to determine, for example, if one's educational practices are more in line with a soft or critical GCE approach.It should, however, be noted that the framework does not act as a "tick-box" exercise, nor does it suggest a pedagogical approach solely informed by a critical GCE once all of the framework's components relevant to that approach have been addressed.Instead, the framework might be used to assist teacher educators in determining where their approach is soft and how to advance it to align more with critical GCE.
Figure 1 below represents a holistic overview of the framework's main elements.

GCE and educational technology
Swarts (2020) provides a critical viewpoint on how information and communication technologies (ICTs)-a form of educational technology-affect the environment and how GCE has to provide new spaces for dialogue and the discipline's future.Swarts (2020) believes that GCE is in a privileged position to make a contribution to societal requirements and that ICTs are useful tools in attaining the goals of GCE.According to Swarts (2020), in order to achieve a balance between the opportunities and challenges that GCE will face in the twenty-first century, GCE researchers, organisations, and practitioners will need to re-evaluate how they think about the field's components in the context of the progression of technology and the pervasiveness of ICTs.Rapoport (2020) submits that GCE continues to be a subject of academic interest among scholars and practitioners who examine how education and technology interconnect.Several studies have been carried out on how the use of ICTs could aid students in developing their global competencies.Although an unsettled and contentious component of citizenship curricula, GCE provides various opportunities for recording and analysing the effect of technology and social networks in improving young people's social and civic engagement (Rapoport, 2020).
According to the findings of a study that Espino et al. (2020) conducted, students who interacted with one another asynchronously through email and synchronously through the use of virtual conference calls, improved their global competencies in the areas of media creation, interaction across cultures, and collaborative learning.According to the research findings, participants at the meet-up assisted one another in acquiring critical skills, stressing the need to consider this environment of media-making, boundary-crossing, and collaborative learning while developing global competencies (Espino et al., 2020).Students may have access to student forums using ICTs where they may have open conversations on social, political, or ideological concerns (Rapoport, 2020).Kopish and Marques (2020) research on a transnational, collaborative curricula project guided by critical pedagogy and social justice approaches to GCE that leveraged technology in courses for pre-service teachers in the United States and Brazil, found that Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) helped develop pre-service teachers' global competencies.The findings of a study conducted by Sturm and Quaynor (2020) on educators' discourse in two hosted Twitter chats that focused on global education, and that examined how these types of chats align with research on high-quality professional learning revealed that teacher exchanges that focused on global education displayed multiple characteristics of high-quality professional learning.These characteristics included a focus on content, active learning and collaboration, and teacher agency (Sturm & Quaynor, 2020).
Moreover, several of the assumptions behind the preceding research on GCE and its practical implementations seem to be related to the use of technology or specific characteristics of education systems that are mainly apposite to developed nations and specific people within those countries (Goren & Yemini, 2017;Reynolds, 2015).In this regard, this present study is apposite to the discourse since it explores GCE from the perspectives of teacher educators in a South African context.

Methodology
The researcher employed a case study research design guided by an interpretive paradigm.The case study design was purposefully selected because it is used to analyse the complexities around real-world issues, particularly when the differences between the phenomena such as GCE and the environment are not clearly defined (Yin, 2008).Purposive sampling was used to identify and select participants with the knowledge, expertise, and willingness to communicate their experiences and opinions expressively and deliberately (Bernard, 2018;Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011;Etikan, 2016).
The Faculty of Education was chosen as the university is the largest institution for teacher preparation in the country and because of the potential for rich involvement due to the potential integration of GCE across a variety of courses.The nine participants were selected on the basis of being full-time teacher educators and having taught specialised subjects within the faculty ranging from five to thirty years of experience in higher education.All teacher educators are required to attend weekly professional development courses throughout the year, with specific courses focusing on teaching using ICTs.In this regard, the participants were an appropriate sample for this study since they attended the majority of the professional development courses throughout the year.Despite the small size of the sample used in this study, samples in qualitative research tend to be small in order to enable the richness of case-oriented analysis that is inherent to this method of inquiry (Vasileiou et al., 2018).The researcher used the Microsoft Teams platform to conduct in-depth semi-structured online interviews with teacher educators who consented to participate, which lasted between 35 and 60 minutes.Since it was convenient for the research participants to be questioned from home in a comfortable and familiar physical environment, online interviews were used (Salmons, 2014).
The online interviews were analysed, and categories were created using Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS), ATLAS.ti, and Andreotti's (2006) Soft vs Critical GCE framework.The CAQDAS was specifically utilised for its capacity to produce the kind of visual representations of data helpful to the process of analysis and which aid readers' deeper comprehension of these interpretations (Rademaker et al., 2012).The utilisation of the framework generated themes based on the participants' thoughts on GCE.The researcher used participants' direct quotes to explain and support the corresponding findings.This study was of an explanatory nature, its goal being to gain in-depth knowledge of the teacher educators' reactions to the interview questions rather than to generalise the findings.Given the limited sample size, the researcher considered the choice of the specific participants to be an appropriate one since the researcher intended to engage in an extended conversation with them to gather detailed information.Yin (2008) argues that a single case can make a major contribution to knowledge expansion by testing, supporting, or expanding the theory.
Data were gathered from consenting study participants, with member checking following data collection to confirm participants' answers.Participants in the study were assured that their participation was voluntary, anonymous, and private.The research ethics committee of the Faculty of Education granted approval for the project, and ethical standards were followed throughout.The term "T.E." was used in place of the teacher educator's name to maintain anonymity.
The following comprises the list of interview questions that served as a guiding framework for the semi-structured interviews: • Question 1: Are you familiar with global citizenship education?
• Question 2: Do you feel that your existing curriculum aims to cultivate global citizenship?
• Question 3: In what specific ways are your current teaching practices using educational technology fostering in your students the ability to think critically as global citizens?
• Question 4: What educational technology are you currently using to support your students, and how effective is it?
• Question 5: Do you feel that your students are becoming more independent through your current practices that employ educational technology?
• Question 6: Do you believe that your students, once they have completed their teacher training, will be able to make a meaningful contribution as digital citizens in their communities in a post-COVID era?
• Question 7: What do you think needs to change in the curriculum to adequately prepare pre-service teachers for the global or local context post-COVID?
• Question 8: Do you think that comparing your students based on the dimensions of global citizenship may create an internal conflict for them?
5. Findings R.Q. 1: How do teacher educators at a South African university conceptualise GCE?

The degree of familiarity and unfamiliarity with GCE
In response to the research question: How do teacher educators at a South African university conceptualise GCE?, when asked about their familiarity with GCE, certain teacher educators (n = 4) confirmed their familiarity/understanding with the phenomenon, while individual teacher educators (n = 5) answered in the negative.However, when asked how well they understood GCE, their responses revealed that the majority (n = 8), despite their with the critical GCE term, have a soft approach to GCE.Only TE-1's understanding appeared to be linked to a critical GCE: rather than using a soft approach that emphasises, say, poverty as the central issue in society, her interpretation of GCE focuses on issues of justice and equity.The researcher attributes TE-1's response to a critical GCE to her understanding of its communal responsibility emphasis, and this being a core component of the approach connected to the concept of an "ethics of care", while a soft approach to GCE holds each party accountable for the "other": Some of the key elements are issues around justice and equity.You know, inclusive education being respectful, tolerant, and the whole idea of taking collective responsibility.

R.Q. 2:
How do the teacher educators at the South African university utilise educational technology in their pedagogical practices to simultaneously facilitate the "soft" and "critical" aspects of GCE, aiming towards the achievement of specific GCE goals?

Teacher educators' curricula for fostering or neglecting global citizenship
In response to research question 2: How do the teacher educators at the South African university utilise educational technology in their pedagogical practices to simultaneously facilitate the "soft" and "critical" aspects of GCE, aiming towards the achievement of specific GCE goals?When asked whether their current curricula fosters global citizenship, some teacher educators (n = 3) asserted that it does not, whereas others (n = 6) stated that it does so to some extent.Even though the majority of teacher educators (n = 5) were unfamiliar with GCE, their curricula appeared to include GCE elements.However, the majority (n = 4) incorporated GCE aspects into their curricula using a soft GCE approach, whereas only two teacher educators (n = 2) were aligned with critical GCE elements.Only two teacher educators (n = 2) appeared to be aligned with critical GCE aspects, and when examining their responses, using the Soft vs Critical GCE framework lens, the researcher found TE-1's method of integrating GCE into her curriculum to be descriptive of this: At the fourth-year level, I stopped lecturing, then they take over, so it's that responsibility that you have, and then I also push for you to bring in examples from diverse communities around the world.What I'm encouraging them to do is to go and read up on what's going on in classrooms in India and Brazil and then bring that into our classroom space.(TE-1) Her approach appeared to be to create spaces for students to explore scenarios in international contexts rather than presenting one scenario, which adds value to her curriculum.Thus, her students are expected to work independently by conducting research and are treated as co-constructors of the curriculum by virtue of this level of responsibility, with new knowledge being (co)created rather than "transferred" to them.What distinguishes her curriculum, and which the researcher attributes to a critical approach to GCE, is her encouraging her students to investigate international contexts that extend beyond their regional/local spheres, which feeds into class discussions.Allowing her students to work freely, the researcher infers, was essential for creating spaces for them in "identifying the problem" -a fundamental tenet of the adapted Soft versus critical GCE framework (Andreotti, 2006).
The approach of TE-1 is also consistent with Wang and Hoffman's (2016) support for a transformationalist GC approach, in which they underscore the significance of GCE in facilitating critical reflection on one's identity and the local and global structures that influence it.Thus, by enabling students to investigate various situations and participate in conversations, they learn how their identity connects to their surroundings, i.e., the glocal and how to prevent marginalising others.In addition, her remark, "I stopped lecturing", demonstrates that she was aware of the need to disrupt the unequal connections that often exist between educators and students, which is linked to the central tenet of the soft versus critical GCE framework (Andreotti, 2006).In this way, "identifying the problem" was also relevant to her own teaching.
Another teacher educator (TE-2) describes how she tries to instil a culture of critical thinking.Her approach included exposing students to issues of discrimination and diversity.Exposing them to the nature of the problem rather than the basic assumption surrounding issues such as racism in the United States and South African contexts: I attempted to incorporate into the programme opportunities for students to interact with students on an international level in order to foster critical thinking.One such opportunity, which is enhanced by the use of educational technology, was last year when we had an African American lecturer who spoke to the students about a book we wrote about Black Lives Matter and police brutality in the United States.So the students came to the session, where she gave a Teams lecture and led a discussion, trying to get the students to think about critical issues like diversity and discrimination, which they could then apply to their own context in South Africa.(TE-2) The use of an online discussion approach may have aided her students' learning with their presenter in an immediate way because they were encouraged to relate their interpretations of contentious issues to their own societal contexts.This approach is aligned with Torres and Bosio's (2020) ideas on fostering students' emotions, which are related to a "ethics of care" element in which the teacher educator's students seemed to share their insights with her and with one another through a co-learning process (Andreotti, 2006).While this may have involved some reflexivity on the part of the students, it was not possible to determine the element of "transformative change" from TE-2's account.However, the approaches of both TE-1 and TE-2 appeared to have created spaces for their students to feel empowered through critical reflection.

Pedagogical practices using technology to foster critical global citizens
In response to research question 2, when asked how their current teaching practices using educational technology foster in their students the ability to think critically as global citizens, TE-3 and TE-4 both acknowledged that it was not feasible to teach with technology in their classroom contexts: the majority of their students lacked access to the technology needed for participation in online learning.In contrast, TE-5 reported that the need to foster in his students a degree of criticality extends beyond the use of technology.Instead, questions about the need to cultivate in his students an awareness of their identities as social constructs had consistently been important to the framing of his courses prior to and during the pandemic: Being on the electronic platform and not face to face, it's almost as if it doesn't matter whether it's in electronic form or face-to-face.The nature of the discourse remains the same whether it was pre-pandemic or during the pandemic, even pre-pandemic.The questions that I posed because what was framing my courses was not the pandemic but the awareness that national identities and these are social constructs within broader constructs.According to research by Gardner McTaggart and Palmer (2018) and Hartley (2016), despite technology's several benefits, it may inadvertently cultivate a sense of alienation or disconnection global citizens.This suggests that the technology designed to connect students may not always strengthen a sense of global citizenship.
Despite TE-5's initial unfamiliarity with the phenomenon, the researcher infers a connection between his response and a critical approach to GCE.Notwithstanding the interview's focus on technology usage, his response appeared to strengthen the concept of critically reflecting on cultural, identity processes, and legacies.This reflection seems intertwined with the notion of "transformative change" (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
Through the researcher's analysis of the respondents' answers, it became apparent that the teacher educators employing educational technology were successfully nurturing critical thinking.Moreover, their approaches reflected attempts to foster a community of practice, resonating with the scholarly works of Espino et al. (2020) and Kopish and Marques (2020) that highlight the efficacy of collaborative online learning in cultivating students' global competencies.TE-6 demonstrated the utilisation of Hyperdocs to stimulate collaborative learning, while in the researcher's practices, TE-2 exhibited a preference for integrating Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs): We use Hyper docs, which allows learners or students to collaborate on a specific document, and once they see other learners' or students' responses to a specific question, they will start thinking, and once they start thinking, they will engage with the content in the learning material, which will then direct them to a position of critical thinking.(TE-6) I also try to bring in MOOCs like Coursera for students to participate in, and there was also a very good online program that we piloted from Fundza, which is a South African group where people are invited to download books for free, work with children in classes, get materials to work with children in classes, and so on.So there was a programme there that our students participated in.At the moment, I only do this with home language students and SPFET students who choose English as an elective, so it's a small group of students, but it's how I'm trying to get students to think critically in my current teaching practice.(TE-2) While technology allows TE-1's students to explore various contexts, she sees the level of criticality as important in assisting them to go beyond simply accepting aspects of a context at face value.Thus, she learns alongside her students rather than imposing her own viewpoints.This approach, the researcher submits, resonates with the element of an "ethics of care" regarding the necessity to harness her students' interdependence (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).She adds: I want them to explore, to use technology as a tool for exploring diverse contexts in which knowledge is generated, and then to take a critical view of whatever they bring into our space when we start engaging.(TE-1)

Students' ability to work independently through educational technology
In response to research question 2, when asked whether they felt their students were more independent with current practices utilising educational technology, the majority of teacher educators (n = 5) believed their students were more independent, while some (n = 3) felt their students had not developed independence.TE-6, TE-7 and TE-8 discuss the effectiveness of educational technology in developing their students' level of independence.
For T.E. 7, educational technology created spaces for the development of communities of practice, which she believes students need to work independently from their lecturer(s).In this regard, her response reflects the element "degree of empowerment" through the use of educational technology in which her students were expected to accept accountability for their choices and actions (Andreotti, 2006).She comments: I think, again, the communities of practice, where we're trying to encourage them to find the knowledge themselves and then share it with their friends or class group, has really encouraged them to work independently from the at the very least.So, perhaps not completely independently, but working as a group of students and not asking a lecturer or someone they know already has the answers, but rather trying to find it for themselves.(TE-7) For TE-6, the pandemic created conditions in which teacher educators and their students were expected to engage differently in an educational context.This teacher educator considered the expectation for students to work independently from their teacher educators required his students to engage more meaningfully and actively with their curriculum content: At this point, we are approaching student independence because the pandemic has taught us to think and act differently.As a result, the students were allowed to work independently.They weren't forbidden from working on their own during face-to-face classroom time, but they got the impression that I need to be independent of my lecturer and all the other sources that will really help me.(TE-6) TE-8 also reported his students being able to conduct their own research related to specific cases or problems presented in the course content without first consulting him.It is also possible to deduce that the use of technology provided his students with the capacity to research and solve problems that they were expected to identify, as confirmed by the literature (Andreotti, 2006;Yang, 2016).He comments: Especially now, I think with online teaching and not being able to physically demonstrate how the application works, I do feel the students have become more independent.I constantly also encourage them that before they struggle with something to come back to me immediately, try and do some research, try and do some troubleshooting, beforehand, so that you are able to first try and solve problems yourself.(TE-8) The findings confirmed that the self-directed learning approach, according to the teacher educators, afforded their students a degree of independence, enabling them to investigate their preferred research topics within their own time and space.This finding further resonates with Kessler and Bikowski's (2010) view that students in flexible environments are not only participants but also active drivers in the learning process.In addition, the teacher educators observed an increased degree of individualism and freedom among their students, who were given the liberty in their choice of topics.This type of freedom promotes not only a degree of responsibility but also creativity and critical thought.Snodin (2013) asserts this perspective as a fundamental component of online self-directed learning, underscoring its potential for transforming teaching and learning practices, which is necessary for strengthening the elements of GCE.

R.Q. 3:
What challenges do the teacher educators perceive when incorporating GCE into their teaching practices in their respective disciplines?

Degree of internal conflict through a soft or critical GCE
In response to Research question 3: What challenges do the teacher educators perceive when incorporating GCE into their teaching practices in their respective disciplines?The findings confirm certain teacher educators' pedagogical approaches that aligned more with soft GCE resulted in problems, including partial alienation, evidence of internalised cultural supremacy, and the reinforcement of colonial relations, which resonates with the available literature (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).These findings are corroborated by TE-4 and TE-7.TE-7's remarks highlight the possibilities for internal conflict resulting from feelings of superiority or alienation towards other cultural groups.She contends that this could create significant barriers for her students when interacting with diverse groups on divisive topics such as race or religion.Her perspective is consistent with extensive academic research (Cochran-Smith, 2005;Eliyahu-Levi & Ganz-Meishar, 2020;Irvine, 2003;Jenks et al., 2001;Villegas, 2007) which establishes a critical flaw in the system of education, -that is, educators' inadequate intercultural competence and who may be unaware of the diverse behaviour patterns, perspectives, beliefs, historical and cultural contexts of their students.Eliyahu-Levi and Ganz-Meishar (2020) assert that educators must cultivate a heightened sense of self-awareness, hone their interpersonal skills, and develop the ability to integrate culturally sensitive considerations into their pedagogical approaches.TE-7 comments: So I really feel that-that our students are sometimes afraid to move outside of the box, and I think that they really are experiencing some extreme internal conflict when they-they have to teach learners how to accept each other, how to participate in groups with learners from other races, other religions, etc. when they themselves are not necessarily open to working in such groups.(TE-7) TE-4 confirms that her students struggle to let go of a Western approach to teaching and learning and instead appear challenged and conflicted by the idea of embracing the concept of "Africanicity": Change is always uncomfortable, but it must happen.So yeah, even with decolonisation and Africanism, I mean, I find it very difficult with our Honours students, for instance, they struggled to embrace the move towards, you know, the Africanacity, the African approach to research.Where they are still hanging on to the books, the physical books of the westernised way of doing things.(TE-4) The willingness of educators in South Africa to engage in both the curricula and their pedagogies critically, self-reflexively, and imaginatively is necessary towards resisting or transforming a colonised curriculum.Defamiliarisation-the critical pedagogical approach to using art and film as a strategy-is such one approach that has been beneficial in decolonising students' mindsets (Waghid, 2023;Waghid & Hibbert, 2018a, 2018b;Waghid & Ontong, 2022).Educators may contribute to a more nuanced, culturally appropriate, and decolonised learning experience by adopting such an approach.TE-5's responses confirmed that his critical GCE-aligned approach may instil a sense of helplessness in his students, which resonates with Andreotti's (2006) thoughts.Their responses to the critical questions on which he focused about poverty indicated his students attributed their own poverty to a lack of economic development in their individual local contexts: I ask the same question to all of the first years if they believe they are poor.Why are you impoverished?And if you believe you are not poor.Why aren't you poor?That question could now be answered locally or globally.And the more global the response, the more nuanced and informed the student, whereas the student who responds very locally expresses a very local understanding that whether he vents poverty or lack of development, it is all sourced in the valley that he calls home.(TE-5) TE-1 sees the existing curriculum's primary focus is on course content rather than on creating spaces for students to engage deliberatively.She makes two points.First, the emphasis on course content may indicate the primary focus of current curricula is on preparing students for the global market.This implies the expectation that aspiring teachers teach subject disciplines with the goal of preparing school students for the economic environment.Second, her response could be related to students' disagreements during class debates, or discussions can lead to resentment toward the other without acknowledging the need for a response which is both critiqued and respected by others: In my experience, there is far too much emphasis on just content, and I don't see enough of these issues being explicitly brought to the fore, where we are engaging and enabling, you know, healthy discussions in which people differ, and it's okay to differ.It is how you respectfully manage your differences in that collective space.(TE-1) The critique of the present curricula by TE-1 emphasises a transition from an underlying neoliberal ideology to one based on democratic principles.TE-1 emphasises the importance nurturing an environment that safeguards rather than violates students' rights.This idea of education fosters discord, critical thought, and mutual respect, creating an atmosphere for learning more akin to a democratic platform than a market-preparing ground.
Moreover, TE-1's remarks are consistent with Young's (2000) description of deliberative encounters, particularly the concepts of reasonableness and rationality.Young (2000) clarifies that reasonableness is not only about expressing beliefs, but also about being receptive to the viewpoints of others, even if they are contrary to one's own.This quality is essential for effective deliberation, as it fosters a learning environment in which diverse viewpoints are respected and recognised.Rationality for Young (2000) necessitates both students and teachers to articulate their reasoning in response to the perspectives of others.This active exchange of ideas enhances the learning experience by fostering a deeper understanding and evaluation of diverse perspectives.

Discussion
The findings from the first research question suggest that GCE per se is not adequately or meaningfully integrated in the institution's curricula.The majority of lecturers, according to the findings, seemed to have a rudimentary understanding of GCE, and their responses primarily indicated a soft GCE approach.The findings suggest inadequate professional development opportunities in teacher education for GCE may exist in the South African context.Orienting teacher educators on the principles, purpose, and pedagogical practices around GCE is essential, particularly if such a curriculum aims to enable students to engage critically in global issues.While the findings suggest that certain teacher educators initiated approaches that the researcher attributes to a critical GCE approach, they emphasise the need to establish a network where teacher educators can share their experiences and practices related to GCE.
Despite the limitations of integrating technology in the classroom, responses to the second research question suggested that it created a degree of critical thinking, autonomy, and community-building among the teacher educators' students.According to the findings, specific digital tools such as Hyperdocs and platforms such as MOOCs, as advocated by individual teacher educators, were necessary for creating a stimulating environment in which their students could think more deeply, independently, and pragmatically about the content of their curricula.While technology has several potential benefits, the successful integration of technology in GCE is a complex process that involves careful planning, ongoing support, and rigorous evaluation to ensure its efficacy in teaching and learning.In a country like South Africa, where the digital divide is significant between the affluent and the majority of historically impoverished individuals, it is critical that the technologies chosen address the diverse needs of all students, enhancing rather than undermining their learning experiences.Involving students in the decision-making process on their use of specific digital tools and platforms is one approach to improving inclusivity and equity in the classroom.Students' agency in constructing the learning environment is increased through fostering areas for discussion and collaborative decision-making.This approach is consistent with the GCE ideas of democratic involvement, critical engagement, and shared accountability.
The third research question's responses revealed lecturers' comprehension of challenges with GCE teaching that might lead to internal conflict among their students.Internal conflicts may emerge when students are uncomfortable with their beliefs and values, particularly when exposed to divergent points of view that contradict their societal beliefs and values.Students, for example, may struggle with applying a critical GCE approach to addressing real-life situations, which may cause discomfort significantly when such practices exacerbate current local and global problems.On the other hand, internal conflict may be a crucial catalyst for expanding student knowledge if carried out effectively by an adept educator.Such an educator is also aware of the adverse effects of introducing critical GCE to cultivate critical awareness and expose students to the diverse domains of global citizenship.
The findings support the importance of formally integrating critical GCE into the MRTEQ policy.This integration would bridge the gap and enhance students' comprehension of GCE, critical thinking skills, and their attitudes and values towards GCE.Addressing this fundamental issue within the existing MRTEQ policy is crucial for achieving the goals of a critical GCE approach, which include empowering students to critically examine negative self-perceptions and cultivate their roles as positive influencers.Consequently, a stronger approach is necessary in the South African context to effectively incorporate GCE into teacher education curricula.
There are further implications of this research I believe a GCE curriculum holds the possibility for aspiring teachers to instil in their learners a sense of criticality, ethical consciousness, interdependence, and the importance of developing a community of practice.The researcher proposes that the adapted Soft vs Critical GCE framework serves as a tool for both curriculum renewal and the development of a critical GCE curriculum through careful integration of the framework's five underlying elements."Identifying the problem" is a central point of departure for framing teacher education curricula with a strong emphasis on a critical GCE approach which the researcher sees as developing in student teachers and in learners an awareness of systemic societal problems that extend beyond their local contexts.Others (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013;Bosio, 2021;Bosio & Waghid, 2022;Pashby & Andreotti, 2015) have argued for a critical approach to positioning students and lecturers to critically scrutinise and understand complex global problems and solutions beyond levels of simplistic, paternalistic North-South encounters, and ethnocentric perspectives on justice.The notion of identifying a problem also resonates strongly with cognitive presence, which is an essential aspect of an online learning community and is initiated by a triggering event, followed by exploration, integration, and resolution (Garrison, 2015).This triggering event in online learning functions as a catalyst.More specifically, students' ability to identify a problem sparked by their interest, curiosity, or exploring content-related questions concerning real-world situations is critical to deepening students' understanding of the complexities of global issues in an online sphere.
Second, while difficulties emerged relating to technology, the opportunity to cultivate spaces for students to work autonomously through self-directed learning meant less dependency on lecturers, a situation the researcher sees as being advantageous in the creation of uncomfortable spaces for students unfamiliar with self-directed learning, spaces to spur them to towards independence.A critical GCE approach encourages university lecturers to acknowledge students as coconstructors rather than recipients of knowledge (Andreotti, 2006;Andreotti & Pashby, 2013).While meaningful online learning necessitates a strong emotional and social presence, allowing students to question the types of educational technology used in hybrid teaching and learning is an important starting point for cultivating strong interconnected relationships with students as well as deeper reflection on the asymmetrical nature of our teaching practices.
Third, the researcher sees a GCE curriculum as the appropriate vehicle for implementing civic engagement initiatives, with university lecturers and students critically reflecting on initiatives which aim to address societal problems such as poverty, illiteracy, and income inequality.While a soft approach to civic engagement initiatives is based on the idea of assisting the marginalised, it has the potential to create communities' reliance on such initiatives.Through conscientisation preservice teachers may be better able to assess the degree to which their abilities to assist the disenfranchised places them in a position of privilege and thus become aware of their level of social responsibility, leading ultimately to collaborative and practical solutions to societal problems (Pashby & Andreotti, 2015).
Fourth, given the flaws of both GCE approaches, the researcher argues that the first step toward transcending one's level of comfort is an acknowledgement of internal conflict.Students who prefer to remain in their comfort zone miss opportunities for personal growth and the development of societal awareness.Thus, researching other social contexts situates students in unfamiliar contexts and serves as a means of accepting accountability with and not for others.Students need support systems in which they are actively encouraged to engage in discussions as a community rather than in isolation in order to develop the emotional, social, and behavioural skills necessary to deal with issues of internal conflict.Particularly for students who are somewhat hesitant to interact with their peers and educators in face-to -face settings, the researcher submits this is a situation where technology may play a significant role in fostering a sense of community.An online platform may help these students feel safe enough to open out emotionally and socially to their peers and educators.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the study examined teacher educators' integration of GCE in the teacher education curricula and provided essential findings.First, the research showed that GCE needs to be more integrated into the current teacher education curricula in South Africa, indicating the need for comprehensive professional development in GCE principles and practices.In this setting, the adapted version of Andreotti's (2006) Soft vs Critical GCE framework may be valuable for assisting curriculum developers in establishing such professional development initiatives.Second, despite some shortcomings associated with integrating educational technology into existing teacher education curricula, the results were encouraging, particularly in cultivating critical thinking, autonomy, and online communities among the teacher educators' students.The potential of using technology to reinforce the principles and ideals of critical GCE is essential for harnessing students' dispositions and capabilities for critical engagement in the midst of complex global issues.While the limitations of GCE may cause conflict among students, they may also catalyse transformational learning.The results emphasise the need for a nuanced approach to integrating a critical GCE approach in teacher education curricula.
Despite the fact that the sample size of this research is a limitation, it may be beneficial to conduct a larger-scale study to expand upon the insights it has already generated.It is suggested that more research be performed to determine the extent to which GCE is incorporated into the pedagogy and curricula of other institutions and a larger group of university lecturers.Using the Soft vs Critical GCE framework, the degree to which GCE is being integrated into curricula in South Africa and other comparable international contexts may be examined.Additionally, the study produces conversations about the measures that other kinds of educational institutions, such as colleges and secondary schools, are undertaking to shape their students into global citizens.To this purpose, the researcher offers further questions for inquiry: "What should educators in universities, colleges and schools in the Global South consider about educators' diverse conceptions of the notion of critical and soft GCE?" and "What implications does this have for a 'decolonised' education system in the twenty-first century?"
(Kim, 2020;Niens (2014)of aspects underpinning global citizenship, that we're interconnected, and you cannot remain in your little, you know, communities any longer.(TE-1)Thefindingalignswiththe outcomes of a study conducted byReilly and Niens (2014)employing a critical GCE framework to analyse how teachers in post-conflict Northern Ireland approach GCE.The study revealed that teachers predominantly perceive GCE as a means to enhance awareness and openness towards others, yet they fail to fully recognise the interdependence between local and global concerns.The results are further consistent with various other studies(Kim, 2020; Pashby & Costa, 2021;Woods & Kong, 2020)exploring educators' perspectives on GCE.These studies suggest that educators' viewpoints on GCE are influenced by the fact that current curricula are rooted in Western ideals, which may espouse notions of inclusion but ultimately assimilate alternative viewpoints.Consequently, it becomes imperative to re-evaluate and broaden existing university curricula and teacher training programmes within the South African education context.Such measures, the researcher contends, are necessary to ensure that GCE becomes a transformative, inclusive, and empowering force for all students.