09 SES 12 A, Global Trends in Migration and Related Challenges in Education: Drawing Evidence from TIMSS and ICCS
Since the phenomenon of “globalization” is progressing over the world, there is a focus on the sustainable development of the education and the understanding of worldwide problems from holistic perspectives(Hett, 1993; Kim et al, 2010). Also with the increase of the international migration and economic corporation in a worldwide, there is a necessity of civic education programs which can improve global citizenship for all of citizens who will be leading a global society in the future. Regarding this global trend, there has been government’s effort to reduce a racial discrimination and improve migrants’ wellbeing by providing various personalized welfare support services. For example, since a global citizenship education was proposed by Korean government as a worldwide agenda at World Education Forum 2015(Unesco, 2015), there have been related programs actively implemented on the education field.
Despite of these efforts, there are still growing concerns regarding the relationship between education process and outcome in Korea. For instance, ICCS(International Civic and Citizenship Education Study) 2009 reported that even though Korean students were ranked at the 3rd in knowledge of global citizenship, their levels of the knowledge are mismatched with those of attitude and action((Kim et al, 2015a). On the other hand, such developed countries, which have better educational environments for students, showed a balance among knowledge, attitude, and action in global citizenship(Schulz et al, 2010).
Indeed, several studies investigated tolerant attitude toward immigrant and minority group found that Korea has lower score compared to other countries. For instance, WVScompared tolerance level of young adults in national level and suggested that tolerance levels of Korean adults and adolescents are comparatively lower than other countries (Lee et al, 2015; Kim et al, 2009).
Similarly, Global Creativity Index (GCI) is another nationwide measure that is based on three overall indexes for technology, talent and tolerance of adults (Florida, Mellander, & King, 2015). The overall creativity is quantified as the average of each country’s rankings across three categories. Nations that rank highly on the GCI also tend to be, on balance, more equal societies regardless of cultural and social class. According to the result, New Zealand takes the very high spot on the overall GCI,up from its third place rank on the 2011 edition, and 16th place rank on 2015. Especially it takes the very high spot in tolerance, which is referred as “openness to ethnic and religious minorities group”.
In case of Korea, it takes the first place overall countries, however, round out the top 50 in talent and even out of 70 in case of tolerance. This imbalanceamong three components implies can be mainly attributed to a low level of tolerance among Korean youth.
The purpose of this study was to examine tolerance level of Korean youth on global citizenship and mechanisms to improve it in the context of Korean traditional value, ‘Cheong’. Cheong is a peculiar feeling that represents the state of affection, intimacy and trust in close relationship(Lee, 1994). Since it is difficult to render the exact meaning in English, the author has decided to employ the original term.
In case of Korea where collectivism is rooted and Confucianism ideas, Cheong has been considered as a traditional value required for individuals to make harmonious relationship with others, especially within a family. For this reason, in Korean society still there are assists that regard human social relations important factor using the frame of Cheong, viewing objectives from “we” rather than “me”.
This study is organized into two major parts. The first part presents comparison of civic competencies on tolerance between Korea and New Zealand youth using ICCS data. The second part is to examine what mechanisms are required to develop tolerance of Korean youth focused on the concept of Cheong. Firstly, it compared multicultural characteristics and educational environment in Korea and New Zealand. To figure out characteristics of global citizenship of Korean and New Zealand youth, cluster analysis was executed based on 4 sub-factors of global citizenship. Utilizing the ICCS(International Civic and Citizenship Education Study) data (5,243 Korean students and 3,979 New Zealand students), several types of global citizenship characteristics in both countries were classified and named: low-tolerance, isolated/deficient, domestic interest, global leader, resistance, international interest. Also, proportions of Korea and New Zealand youth among the types of global citizenship are compared. Secondly, this study used two types of perspectives that are known as Korean traditional empathic abilities and critical elements for global citizenship education(Kim et al, 2015b). The data was collected from 6,637 students from a survey measuring fairness and cheong perspectives, and youth global citizenship. Focusing on the character cheong(人情) , which represents one of Korean character strengths, this study aimed to examine the relationship between perspective taking development and the multicultural understanding; 1) age and development of multicultural understanding, 2) age and development of fairness perspective and cheong perspective, and 3) expansion of both of perspectives and multicultural understanding. For the first part, the criteria variables are components of civic competence - civic knowledge (skills), class-openness (attitude), and school participation (behaviors), and a tolerance, which is divided into 2 parts- Students’ attitudes towards equal rights for immigrants and Students’ attitudes towards equal rights for race. For the second part of this study, we used two internal inflicts scenarios were given to students to measure two perspectives. Value-oriented scores on the two judgment criteria (Fairness vs Cheong) were obtained by calculating scores discriminating on the corresponding values in the setting above in the Fairness and Cheong oriented value dimensions. Also, Global Citizenship is consisted of 4 parts - Attitude toward immigrant, perception of nation and history, and understanding of international relationship and sex recognition.
The result of the first part revealed that Korean youth captured more of negative (low-tolerance, isolated/deficient) types than New Zealand, and less of positive (global leader, international interest) types. In particular, Korean youth showed a smaller gap between knowledge scores of positive and negative types. At last, the relationship among global citizenship classification and global citizenship educational competences (cognition, attitude, and behavior) were analyzed. In the cognitive area of global education, Korea youth were higher than New Zealand. However, New Zealand youth showed higher scores in attitude and action of global citizenship education. Based on the differences between Korean and New Zealand characteristics on global citizenship education, perspectives and contents of global citizenship education were discussed. There is a necessity of education programs focused on students’ attitude and action in global citizenship for the future of Korean global citizenship education. Also, the result from the second part showed that students in the upper school levels have lower scores in ‘attitude to immigrants’ and ‘perception of nation and history’ compared to those in the lower school levels. Whereas Fairness perspective was developed from the very lower school levels, cheong, a perspective of Korean traditional culture, was developed as students enrolled in the upper school levels. Also, as both of perspectives demonstrated a positive relationship with their level of multicultural understanding. In other words, when students’ cheong and Fairness perspectives are expanded, their understanding of multiculturalism also increased. This result demonstrates that expansion of cheong perspective is crucial for students’ multicultural understanding development.
 Hett, E. J. “The development of an instrument to measure global-mindedness”. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Sandiego. 1993.  Kim, J. H., Park, S. H., and Cho, S. M. “What Affects Korean Undergraduates’ Global Perspective and Attitude Toward Cultural Diversity?”, Korea Youth Research Association, 17(4), 2010a, pp. 183-210.  Kim, T. J., Oh, M. A, and Lee, E. K, The developmental mechanism for global citizenship: Perspective taking and cheong, Proceedings of Korean Association for Multicultural Education: KAME, 2015b.  Lee, S.W, “The Cheong Space: A Zone of Non-Exchange in Korean Human Relationships”, Psychology of Korean People : Collectivism and Individualism, Seoul : Publishing Co, 1994, pp.85-99.  Schulz, W., Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Losito, B. and Kerr, D, International Civic and Citizenship Education Study. Assessment Framework, Amsterdam: IEA, 2008.  Schulz, W., Ainley, J., Fraillon, J., Kerr, D., & Losito, B. ICCS 2009 International Report: Civic Knowledge, Attitudes, and Engagement among Lower-Secondary School Students in 38 Countries. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Herengracht 487, Amsterdam, 1017 BT, The Netherlands, 2010.  Triandis, H. Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder: Westview Press. 1995.  Unesco, World Education Forum 2015 Final Report, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France, 2015.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.