Europe and North America Regional GCED Network

foundation for global relations (Pashby et al., 2020).
Liberal GCED interfaces with neoliberal orientations particularly emphasising
individual rights and competencies within a global system. Drawing particularly
on the work of Oxley and Morris (2013), Pashby and colleagues (2020) show
that while liberal orientations promote an ethical stance towards "others" and a
critique of western cultural dominance, in some cases, the ultimate onus is on
the "individual to become more culturally competent rather than on significant,
systemic changes to the status quo" (p. 152). Further, they point out that liberal
orientations stop short of exploring onto-epistemic possibilities beyond a
modern/colonial imaginary, including how this pervasive imaginary might be
informing critiques of western dominance.
Critical
We thus turn, therefore, to critical GCED orientations, which Pashby and
colleagues (2020) have shown to be the most internally diverse category.
Broadly, critical orientations acknowledge and seek to address social
injustices (Tarozzi & Torres, 2016; Tarozzi, 2021). In efforts to reverse the
legacy of colonialism, much critical GCED thus questions hegemonic
"structures, systems, assumptions, power relations and attitudes that create
and maintain exploitation and enforced disempowerment" (Andreotti, 2014,
p. 6), providing opportunities for students to face their complicity in injustice
and acknowledge the contextual and historical nature of their knowledge and
identities (cf. Andreotti & de Souza, 2008) and how such knowledge shapes
their engagement with people in other positions. Some critical expressions
are particularly anti- or decolonial, taking active steps to expose the epistemic
violence of colonialism, which creates an abyss (de Sousa Santos, 2007)
between those who are constructed as knowable, inferior, or undeveloped
and those who set the terms of knowability according to western norms.
By encouraging students to "challenge dominant ideologies, disassemble
hierarchies of power, and question curricula and pedagogy" (Lapayese, 2003,
p. 500), much critical GCED is transformational, seeking to establish "new ways
of negotiating between local and global actions and agenda, resolving conflict,
and acting in solidarity" (Shultz, qt. in Pashby, 2009, p. 61). At the same time,
Pashby and colleagues indicate a number of interfaces between critical and
liberal orientations, according to the extent to which each position "offer[s] an
alternative to extant structures, systems, and subjectivities (more critical) or
more strongly align[s] with universal morally liberal commitments (more liberal"
(Pashby et al., 2020, p. 156). Due to the interfaces between these two more
prevalent GCED orientations, we use our analysis to explore their overlaps and
divergences among the networks.
As our research is situated in the Global North, we are also interested in the
presence or absence of what Pashby et al. (2020) drawing on Stein (2015)
and Andreotti (2014) to term critical-postcritical GCED - an expression that is
rarely found in practice in the Global North and in fact may be "unimaginable
018ㆍ 019