The concept of citizenship is nowadays enlarged and not any more bounded to the nation, but also use for being citizen of the world. People are now living in a global world and the responsibility for the globe and for humanity is linked with the concept of citizenship. In several empirical studies on pedagogical goals, practices and outcomes of citizenship education we found that citizenship can be oriented to different goals, practices and outcomes. We could distinguish between an adapted type of citizenship, an individualistic type and a critical-democratic type. The adapted citizen is focused on discipline and adapting to the community, the individualistic type emphasise autonomy and personal concern. The critical-democratic type combines autonomy and social concern (Veugelers, 2007; Leenders, Veugelers & De Kat, 2008a; 2008b). These different types are not linked to a special area of citizenship, but are general moral, social and political orientations. In the literature on global citizenship we also can find different concepts, concepts that relate to different goals, practices and outcomes. In particular the concept of cosmopolitain citizenship is well known (Nussbaum, 1996; Hansen, 2008). It refers to moral values like openness, enhancing human capabilities and responsibility. There are also other concepts of global citizenship like a more liberal and market oriented concept of openness (Soros, 2006). Or a more political concept of social change (Mouffe, 2005; Thayer-Bacon, 2007). Based on a review of the literature we developed three different kinds of global citizenship (Veugelers, Derriks & De Kat, 2008): - Open global citizenship (knowledge of other cultures and open attitude) - Moral global citizenship (Value differences, and stimulating capabilities and taking responsibilities). This kind of concept is often called cosmopolitain citizenship. - Social-political global citizenship (aiming at equality in social and political relations)

In an exploratory study we asked teachers and methodologists of relevant school subjects (history, geography, social studies, world view education) about their pedagogical goals in global citizenship education and their practices. We also asked them if there was a difference in the debate and in the educational practice now in the focus on global citizenship compare with the sixties and seventies focus on making education more political and more attention for the ‘Third World’. We had extended interviews with 9 experts. We transcripted the interviews and analysed the interviews on similarities and differences (Babbie, 2005). Based on the review of the literature and on the analyses of the interviews we could go into greater detail in the different types of global citizenship.

The relationship between the three concepts of global citizenship is inclusive, this means that the moral global citizenship includes the open global citizenship. The social-political global citizenship adds the political and social-transformative to the moral global citizenship. The data show that teachers find knowledge (a) and an open attitude (b) important. Teachers are in global citizenship education really focused on moral values. Appreciating values (c), enhancing possibilities (d), taking responsibilities (e) also on the local level are important (f). However teachers are very reluctant on the political level. They say that they are often aware that social and moral relationships are at stake, but they don’t want to be too political and in particular not too transformative (g). Their arguments for not being to social-political are the delicacy of more political values in formal education and the danger of transferring values instead of helping these young students to develop values.