Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation’s Pro Bono Internship Program 2016/2017 – GREAT Ethical Corpus


Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation’s Pro Bono Internship Program 2016/2017

Seeking Committed, Loyal, Results-oriented Pro Bono Professionals, Students, Volunteers, Work Placements, Internships for the the Next Phase of our Development 2016-2020 – The Events Organising Phase

We are organising an active Platform for the Exchange of some of the Greatest Ideas for the Restoration & Preservation of the SANCTITY of ALL HUMAN LIVES for the Elimination of Needless Human Suffering and for the Advancement of Human Civilisation to Bequeath the Youth with a More Hopeful Futuristic Legacy. The GREAT Summits Series kicks off coming Autumn 2016 with the consideration of Global Citizens Rights in Territories subjected to Foreign Military Invasions.

To this end we are recruiting for the 2016/2017 batch of Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundations Pro Bono Internship Program.

Are you passionate about Global Citizenship Rights?

Are you passionate about the Preciousness of ALL Human Lives?

Are you passionate about the Failure of the Status Quo to manifest the Global Citizenship Rights of Majority Global Citizens?

Are you concerned about Economic Inequality between the Financially Rich and Poor – internationally and in the United Kingdom?

Are you concerned about the unfair Bleaker future for Contemporary Youth, not least, Mounting Graduate Unemployment?

Are you alarmed by corruption in the political systems including Wikileaks and the Panama Papers?

Are you interested in contributing to New Approaches to manifesting the Global Citizenship Rights of ALL Citizens?

Are you able to commit to scale-up the International Chancellery of a leading Global Citizenship Rights Organisation with a strong track record for high impact results, campaigns, advocacy?

If so contact the Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation | GREAT Ethical Corpus indicating what you can contribute and time commitments:
– Administration
– Events Organising
– Advocacy
– Campaigning
– Research
– Representation
– Fundraising
– Corporate Social Networking
– Websites Maintenance

Emails –

Websites –

If interested, please forward your CV with a Brief Covering Letter indicating

  • What Competencies – Skills, Experience, Aptitudes, Value you can contribute to the GREAT Summits
  • Your time Commitment ]preferably 3 months commitment minimum

We look forward to hearing from you.

Ps] Corpus GREAT Institutes is a Virtual Organisation. As such most work can be done from your own home, with monthly meetings either electronically or physically. We are an ethically-oriented, innovative and results-oriented agency committed to Excellent Operational Processes.


Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logos6

By Order of the Board of Ambassadors & Fellows

International Chancellery, Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation | GREAT Ethical Corpus, London. United Kingdom




Global Citizenship Perspectives | Corpus GREAT Institutes


Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logo1


What is Global Citizenship:

It is a way of living that recognises our world is an increasingly complex web of connections and interdependencies. One in which our choices and actions may have repercussions for people and communities locally, nationally or internationally.


What is global citizenship?

Global citizenship nurtures personal respect and respect for others, wherever they live. It encourages individuals to think deeply and critically about what is equitable and just, and what will minimise harm to our planet. Exploring global citizenship themes help learners grow more confident in standing up for their beliefs, and more skilled in evaluating the ethics and impact of their decisions.

What is a global citizen?

“An ethic of care for the world.” Hannah Arendt

There is a great deal of debate and discussion around this question, as there is around the whole concept of globalisation. A useful working definition, however, is offered by Oxfam:

A Global Citizen is someone who:

  • is aware of the wider world and has a sense of their own role as a world citizen
  • respects and values diversity
  • has an understanding of how the world works
  • is outraged by social injustice
  • participates in the community at a range of levels, from the local to the global
  • is willing to act to make the world a more equitable and sustainable place
  • takes responsibility for their actions.

To be effective Global Citizens, young people need to be flexible, creative and proactive. They need to be able to solve problems, make decisions, think critically, communicate ideas effectively and work well within teams and groups. These skills and attributes are increasingly recognised as being essential to succeed in other areas of 21st century life too, including many workplaces. These skills and qualities cannot be developed without the use of active learning methods through which pupils learn by doing and by collaborating with others.

Why is global citizenship education needed?

“Education must be not only a transmission of culture but also a provider of alternative views of the world and a strengthener of skills to explore them” Jerome S Bruner

With the interconnected and interdependent nature of our world, the global is not ‘out there’; it is part of our everyday lives, as we are linked to others on every continent:

  • socially and culturally through the media and telecommunications, and through travel and migration
  • economically through trade
  • environmentally through sharing one planet
  • politically through international relations and systems of regulation.

The opportunities our fast-changing ‘globalised’ world offers young people are enormous. But so too are the challenges. Young people are entitled to an education that equips them with the knowledge, skills and values they need in order to embrace the opportunities and challenges they encounter, and to create the kind of world that they want to live in. An education that supports their development as Global Citizens.

The active, participatory methods of Education for Global Citizenship and Sustainable Development help young people to learn how decisions made by people in other parts of the world affect our lives, just as our decisions affect the lives of others. Education for Global Citizenship and Sustainable Development also promotes pupil participation in the learning process and in decision-making for the following reasons:

  • Everything done in school sends out messages, so we need to exemplify the values we wish to promote. If we wish to affirm beliefs about the equality of all human beings and the importance of treating everyone fairly and with respect, we need to ensure that learning processes, and relationships between pupils and teachers, reflect and reinforce these values.
  • Research shows that in more democratic schools pupils feel more in control of their learning, and the quality of teaching, learning and behaviour is better.
  • The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child affirms the right of children to have their opinions taken into account on matters that affect them.

What does it look like in the classroom?

“Education is not a preparation for life, it is life itself.” John Dewey

Education for global citizenship deals with issues of global interdependence, diversity of identities and cultures, sustainable development, peace & conflict and inequities of power, resources & respect.

These issues are addressed in the classroom through a wide and evolving variety of participatory teaching and learning methodologies, including structured discussion and debate, role-play, ranking exercises, and communities of enquiry. Such active methods are now established as good practice in education, and are not unique to global citizenship. Curriculum for Excellence has at its core a commitment to improved student participation in order to develop the four capacities: successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors.

It is crucial to be aware that, far from promoting one set of answers or values or attitudes, education for global citizenship encourages children and young people to explore, develop and express their own values and opinions. (Always requiring too that they listen to and respect other people’s points of view.) This is an important step towards children and young people making informed choices as to how they exercise their own rights and their responsibilities to others.

It is also vital that teachers at all levels do not approach education for global citizenship with the feeling that they must have all the answers – impossible anyway in such a fast changing world. The role of the teacher is to enable pupils to find out about their world for themselves and to support them as they learn to assess evidence, negotiate and work with others, solve problems and make informed decisions.

Education for Global Citizenship and Social Responsibility by Julie Andrzejewski & John Alessio


Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logo2

On November 10, 1995, Ken Saro-Wiwa, an Ogoni author and Nobel peace prize nominee, was executed for trying to stop the ecological devastation wrought by Royal/Dutch Shell Oil Company and the murders and human rights violations against the Ogoni people by the Nigerian government on behalf of Shell (Sachs, 1996, p. 11). Similarly, Chico Mendez was assassinated in 1988 for trying to protect the jobs of Brazilian rubber tappers and stop deforestation of the Amazon rainforest by wealthy cattle ranchers (Sachs, 1995, pp.1-2). How do these events pertain to people in the United States? Are teachers prepared to help their students develop the global consciousness needed to support human rights and ecological sustainability?

Our educational experiences did not provide us with the information and tools to understand what is happening in the world, how it affects our lives, the lives of others and the planet itself. We were not taught how we, as ordinary (non-rich) people, might live our lives and actively participate in creating a safer, more humane, sustainable world. Much of what I, Andrzejewski, now teach, I did not learn in my formal education. As a result of social movements, I encountered information that was never addressed in all of my years of schooling. Non-profit alternative press helped me realize that certain perspectives were also not represented in the news media I normally read. Information from these sources challenged and contradicted many things I had learned in my formal education. They connected deeply with my own life experiences, as a female, first generation college graduate, whose mother worked as a retail clerk and whose father was chronically underemployed. My experiences with this new information sparked a life-long self-education process through which I analyzed, questioned and investigated the conventional wisdom of many issues.

As the son of Italian immigrants, I, Alessio, was taught in school that immigrants came to the United States to escape the hardships of their backward cultures. What I learned from my father, and later from reading more accurate accounts of Italian migration, was that southern Italians were recruited with promises of riches by American companies seeking cheap labor. My father, like so many others, found himself working twelve hours a day in unsafe coal mines for essentially no pay. His boat fare was taken out of his paycheck, so he was forced to buy food on credit from the company store. Each “payday” he received no money, only a note saying how much he owed the company. At a certain point the store cut off his credit denying him even a loaf of bread for his children. My father became a union organizer to seek basic rights and some sense of dignity. I did not learn about the deception and exploitation of immigrants in school, nor the importance of unions to millions of workers. Personal experiences such as this made me acutely aware of other major gaps and forms of misinformation in my education.

The fact that we had to engage in self re-education might not seem very startling or distressing if students in the United States today were learning very different things than what we learned. However, in spite of the sincere efforts and dedication of talented educators in underfunded schools, the students in our classes seem to arrive at the university with many of the same myths and misinformation that took us years to investigate and unravel. With few exceptions, the basic information and skills taught have remained, by and large, the same for many years. Despite two decades of various state rules and mandates for multicultural, gender-fair education, most school districts, lacking in resources and overwhelmed with problems, have found ways to meet the surface requirements of such rules while changing very little actual content. In far too many schools, Columbus still “discovered America.” George Washington is still the “father” of “our” country. History is still too often the stories of great white males with the few “exceptional” women and people of color added for “diversity.” The U.S. is presented as the best nation in the world; one which, despite a few “mistakes,” fights for human rights and democracy. Other countries are primarily studied for the natural resources available in them. People from other countries are generally portrayed as less knowledgeable, less advanced technologically and often incapable of handling their own country’s affairs. Science is presented as a value-neutral system representing the only accurate information in the world, and always working for the betterment of society. Nature is often portrayed as a commodity, to be exploited, sold or altered for human consumption or profit. Democracy is presented as the study of how effectively the United States government works within the comforting system of checks and balances. The familiar list goes on.

It is widely acknowledged that education rarely challenges the prevailing paradigms and interests of national governments, wealthy elites, or dominant groups, whatever the economic or political system. In fact, there is a substantial body of literature documenting the revision and misrepresentation of history, education, and science in the United States (Charnes, 1984; Fitzgerald 1979; Harding 1993; Loewen 1995; Zinn 1995). Such myths, lies, and distortions serve to certify the superiority of certain groups, maintain their dominance and privileges and project their view of the world. This is done by justifying their actions or policies, omitting differing perspectives, discouraging student concern or questions and downplaying the significance of the actions of ordinary people for constructive social change. Misinformation survives from generation to generation if teachers teach what they have been taught. As teachers, we have a responsibility to critically review our own education and seek out viewpoints that were not represented.

Is there a conflict between education for social responsibility and education for jobs?

This paper is not another attack on teachers and schools. Rather it is an effort to re-examine the political pressures on schools and teachers to narrowly prepare students for the workforce rather than for broader citizenship and social responsibility purposes. As McNeil (1991) points out, this is not a new issue.

Our public schools have evolved historically as organizations serving two potentially conflicting purposes: to educate citizens and to process them into roles for economic production. To accomplish the first, schools have the role of supplying students with information and with learning skills. The results can be unpredictable because children’s intellects and skills develop in ways that we cannot predetermine. For the second goal, schools process students through stratified steps leading to predictable, marketable credentials for the workplace. The steps, and some of the outcomes, can be managed, controlled. Thus the school is organized to be in conflict with itself. (p. 3)Teachers and educational institutions, already under pressure from multiple studies of U.S. schools, beginning with Goodlad and Boyer in 1983, are seeing the pressure intensify as a plethora of school reforms are implemented to institutionalize additional workplace demands from the private sector. For example, The Summary Report of the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future entitled, What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future, developed for policy-makers and educators, sees educating workers for the global economy as the primary mission of education.

The Nature of the ProblemGood teaching is more important than ever before in our nation’s history. Due to sweeping economic changes, today’s world has little room for workers who cannot read, write, and compute proficiently; find and use resources; frame and solve problems with other people; and continually learn new technologies and occupations…. The education challenge facing the United States is not that its schools are not as good as they once were. It is that schools must help the vast majority of young people reach levels of skill and competence once thought within the reach of only a few, while also supporting a just and civil society that helps maintain our democratic life…. (1996, pp.6-7)

“Supporting a just and civil society” and maintaining democracy are of less than secondary importance since they are never mentioned again in the report. Global issues other than work are not addressed at all. Smith contends that the focus of school reforms on producing workers is not accidental.

…as Barlow and Robertson (1994, p.79) describe it, North America’s corporate leaders have three fundamental goals in relation to the takeover of public education. The first is “to secure the ideological allegiance of young people to a free-market world view on issues of the environment, corporate rights and the role of the government.” The second is “to gain market access to the hearts and minds of young consumers and to lucrative contracts in the education industry.” The third is “to transform school into training centres producing a workforce suited to the needs of transnational corporations.” It is these goals which underwrite the large-scale move of corporate interests into the domains of curriculum development, environmental education, and funding-in-exchange for technology and brand rights in schools. (1998, pp.8-9)Smith outlines three strategies used to mobilize public opinion toward the accomplishment of these goals: 1) to portray public education as failing; 2) to increase the fear of competition used to indoctrinate students into “cutthroat business management” and 3) to “engineer a break-up of public education systems through proposals for ‘choice'” through vouchers, charter schools and the like (p. 9).

Evidence of the effectiveness of this strategy permeates the media (Berliner & Biddle, 1995). Blamed for any or all of society’s ills, schools have become the target of severe budget cutbacks, business advertising contracts (Draper, 1998, p. A3), escalating standards for teachers and students, and threats ranging from privatizing public schools (Lowe & Miner, 1996; Hotakainen, 1998, p.A1, p. A10) to closing teacher preparation programs (Lively, 1998, pp. A27-A28). Amidst all the blame, recrimination and punitive proposals, the most important question still goes begging: What is the primary purpose of education? Are we educating students for competitive employment in the global marketplace or are we educating global citizens who can respond creatively to the enormous and pressing issues facing humankind in the twenty-first century? What happens when these purposes conflict with one another? If education at all levels has a responsibility to prepare global citizens to address the problems of the world, what is that responsibility, and are we, as educators and policymakers, prepared to meet it?

Are educational institutions meeting their mission of educating citizens?

Preparing students to become knowledgeable citizens has been identified as a purpose of education throughout U. S. history from Jefferson to Dewey and beyond. Most schools still identify citizenship as a primary mission of education but how does this translate into the curriculum? What knowledge and skills are identified as important for good citizenship? A 1997 third grade textbook, Living in Our World (Boehm et al), provides a common answer. It emphasizes obeying the law as the primary responsibility of citizenship. On eight of thirteen pages relating to citizenship, laws are the focus.

Citizens have rights, but they also need to be responsible. A citizen is responsible for obeying the laws. Citizens who do not obey the laws may face the consequences of their actions. The consequences may include paying a fine or going to jail (p. 261).It is little wonder when upper division college students are asked to list the citizenship skills they have learned throughout their educational experiences, they inevitably list the same five “skills:”

1. vote
2. obey the law
3. pay taxes
4. salute the flag, and
5. say the pledge of allegiance.

Occasionally, a student will list the proverbial advice to write to your congressperson but when asked how many have actually done that, only one or two respond, indicating it was not part of their education. While “participatory democracy” is lauded in educational contexts, it is not what students are learning.
Why should citizenship be viewed in a global context?

As the millennium nears, people all over the world are struggling with problems of a magnitude no other generation has faced. Even in the most affluent nations, millions of people suffer from hunger, homelessness, and unattended health problems. Wars, civil conflicts and invasions take the lives of millions more. Global changes in the climate are creating severe local weather conditions, destroying lives and property. Human projects continue to despoil the land, water and air. For example, millions of tons of hazardous waste generated by industrial countries are exported to non-industrialized areas of the world (Sachs, 1995, p.7). Over three billion pounds of pesticides a year are used globally causing “human poisonings, harm to fish and wildlife, livestock losses, groundwater contamination, destruction of natural vegetation, and more pests resistant to pesticides” (Jacobson et al, 1991, p. 45). Deforestation, soil erosion, destruction of habitat, extinction of species, depletion of aquifers are but a few of the many attacks on our planet. While natural resources are stripped from the earth, new “species” are genetically engineered by corporations for profitability and monopolized through complex international patent laws with few constraints for releasing them into the environment. Ancient knowledge of plants and animals, and even human genetic material, are stolen from indigenous peoples and used to generate wealth for a few while the cultures which generated the knowledge are decimated (Shiva, 1997). As these examples demonstrate, human rights and environmental issues are clearly intertwined.

Many contradictions exist. Countries with hungry people export grains or feed them to livestock for export. Millions of jobs are eliminated by technology or runaway factories as CEO salaries skyrocket. While the United Nations ratified a Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989, more than 250 million children are forced into labor (Sanders, 1997). Enormous resources are wasted on the production of guns and weapons of destruction as social programs and education funds are drastically reduced. Projects to solve one problem have created other problems. Dams, viewed for decades as creating “clean” energy and providing irrigation, are responsible for destroying the means of subsistence for millions of people who are forced to relocate their homes. Altering the natural flow of rivers, these dams flood millions of hectares of arable land, create conditions for water born diseases and prevent fish from spawning. Aquaculture, heralded as the answer to declining fish and shrimp populations, is despoiling the habitat of other species. McMichaels states the problem succinctly:

More recently, the human portfolio of burgeoning population size, overworked land, energy-intensive technology and waste-generating consumerism has resulted in accelerated and massive changes to the environment. As a consequence, the world’s natural systems are today coming under increasing overload from one of its own resident species. This is a ‘first’ in Earth’s history, and it has widespread implications for the health and survival of all species. (1993, p.36)While education has a long history of benefiting dominant groups at the expense of others, developments in the world today present a situation which we can continue to ignore only at our own risk. There is ample documentation that, in the short time human beings have been on earth, we have had an extremely deleterious impact on the planet, on other species and on each other. A small group of global elites and corporations continue to benefit from systems of extracting natural resources and concentrating wealth which were established during colonial and neocolonial periods. Indeed, they are currently in the process of restructuring the world from nation-states into a global economic system to facilitate faster, more efficient resource extraction and cheaper labor for even greater profits at the expense of the environment and human lives. Because of fast track ratification, few people realize that international trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT have undermined the capability of national governments to develop and implement their own policies. For instance, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch (1997) reports that the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) would “dramatically undermine the ability of federal, state and local governments to shape economic and social policies that foster safe, healthy and equitable communities.” Only because ordinary people around the world have begun to protest such global policies being made without their involvement has MAI been stalled at the moment. Yet, every social institution is being transformed to best serve the interests of the global corporate agenda, including education.

The primacy of profit maximization over all other values is the core of both social and environmental problems. Nations and nature are being restructured to meet this primary goal, not to meet the needs of ordinary people or to ensure a sustainable environment. The problems created are global, with consequences for many different countries and communities. For example, when U. S. companies move plants and jobs to other countries to take advantage of cheaper labor, they leave economic devastation in local U.S. communities and undermine the existing economies in the new locations. At the same time, they take advantage of less stringent environmental policies in other countries that allow them to pollute more freely or to use chemicals banned in the United States. Sometimes, these chemicals return to consumers in the U.S. in the imported products. Global problems necessitate going beyond national borders to embracing the concept of global citizenship. By learning how global issues affect individual and community lives, how and why decisions are made which affect the planet and life on it and, most importantly, means by which the future can be influenced, education can prepare students to become socially responsible global citizens.

Why aren’t educators teaching about these issues?

Issues of global justice, environment, survival, human rights and citizenship are, for the most part, not major components of the curriculum in PK-12 schools and are still given short shrift in higher education institutions. They are rarely addressed by administrators, school boards or trustees, teacher or faculty unions, state legislators, proposals for educational reform, nor even the Congress of the United States, at least in relation to education. Where global issues are addressed, they are often approached through the biased perspectives of ethnocentrism, national chauvinism, and global economic dominance.

There are several possible reasons for the absence of global citizenship in the curricula of our schools. First, because many educators and policymakers in the United States don’t experience or see the immediate consequences of these problems, it is possible to distance ourselves from them. They are someone else’s problems. In addition, many of these issues, like global warming or aquifer depletion, are trends, not catastrophic events (McMichael, 1993). They don’t appear to require immediate action. The problems we do see seem to be local or individual. In addition, corporate public relations campaigns try to convince “…the American public that most ecological problems are not serious, or do not exist at all, and that the cost of environmental regulation to American businesses, taxpayers, and workers is too expensive” (Faber, 1998, p. 34).

Second, global issues seem immensely depressing and insurmountable, leading people to believe we can have little or no influence on them. What action could one possibly take which would have the slightest impact on issues of such magnitude? We are often overwhelmed enough with the difficulties of our own lives, much less taking on problems at the global level.

Third, teachers have been taught to avoid “political” issues that differ from the conventionally accepted beliefs embedded in the traditional curriculum. The structure of schools encourages the fragmentation, mystification, simplification and omission of knowledge for efficiency and control (McNeil, 1991, pp.166-178). Teachers often learn how to teach defensively to reduce controversy, student resistance, parental objections and administrative sanctions. “School knowledge,” like fast food, has been overcooked and pre-packaged for immediate consumption. Divorced from “real world” knowledge relevant to broad community life experiences, student disengagement should not be surprising to anyone.

Finally, as discussed earlier, educators have not usually been taught about issues of social and global responsibility in our own school experiences. If we don’t feel we have the confidence, knowledge and skills necessary to make a positive contribution ourselves, how can we expect to encourage these attributes in our students? Furthermore, teachers will not learn to value and include issues of socially responsible global citizenship if teacher educators, administrators and policymakers do not. If teachers/faculty are not aware of global issues, if we are not active citizens ourselves, if we do not question, investigate and critically analyze the social and economic institutions in our lives, it will be difficult for us to foster these behaviors in others. Therefore, as we continue to re-educate ourselves about issues of race, class, gender and disability, we must face the challenge of global issues on the horizon.
What do we mean by global citizenship?

As should be clear by now, we are defining global citizenship as knowledge and skills for social and environmental justice (Andrzejewski, 1996, pp.3-9). More specifically, what does this mean? The following comprehensive learning objectives, developed by a broad-based faculty committee with representatives from many disciplines, could provide a working document for developing global citizenship skills over a student’s entire educational experience.

Understanding of a citizen’s responsibilities to others, to society and to the environment:1. Students will be able to examine the meaning of democracy and citizenship from differing points of view including non-dominant, non-western perspectives.
2. The student will explore the various rights and obligations that citizens may be said to have in their communities, nations and in the world.
3. Students will understand and reflect upon their own lives, careers, and interests in relation to participatory democracy and the general welfare of the global society.
4. Students will explore the relationship of global citizenship and responsibility to the environment.

Understanding of ethical behavior in personal, professional and public life:

1. Students will be familiar with fundamental national and international laws, documents and legal issues pertaining citizenship, democracy and human rights.
2. Students will be able to identify the civic and ethical responsibilities of people in specific fields/careers.
3. Students will be able to compare and evaluate the policies of an institution, community, state or nation in the context of its stated philosophical and cultural values.
4. Students will be able to examine various social policies and institutions (educational, economic, political, legal, media, military, etc.) in relation to fostering citizenship, democracy, respect for diversity, human rights and the environmental impact.
5. Students will examine the interrelationship of personal and professional decisions/actions on society and the environment.

Knowledge and skills for involved responsible citizenship at the local, state, national and global level:

1. Students will have knowledge of an increasingly pluralistic society and world where the requirements of citizenship are open to important debates between citizens of different nationalities, races, colors, creeds, genders, religions, abilities and disabilities, and sexual orientations.
2. Students will be able to locate information from a variety of sources, identify underlying values and investigate the veracity of information.
3. Students will be able to identify and investigate problems, examine underlying assumptions, synthesize information, formulate solutions, identify constituencies, compose arguments and identify appropriate forums for taking actions.
4. Students will understand and practice various forms of citizenship skills: self-empowerment/ assertiveness, media analysis, letter writing, evaluation of candidates, lobbying, organizing, etc.
5. Students will be encouraged to demonstrate skill development in participatory democracy by the completion of a community service, citizen participation or social action project. (SCSU General Education Subcommittee on Citizenship and Democracy, 1997)*

While the ideal of developing citizenship skills is claimed in many educational documents, it is, for the most part, not operationalized, not reconceptualized based on new global events, not purposefully incorporated into curricula, not clearly identified in standards, and not assessed in any meaningful way. These clear objectives, developed by a group with widely diverse ideologies, provide a basis for making the ideal of citizenship a reality. Many of the topics covered by these objectives raise fundamental questions about survival of the earth and the interaction of humans with nature and with each other. How are the lives of people in the United States connected to the lives of people in other countries? Do human beings have the right to use plants and animal species for any purposes whatsoever? Should there be limits to the destruction of natural habitats? What different issues present themselves in urban, rural and suburban environments? Do transnational corporations have ethical responsibilities? Does consumption create happiness? What is the impact of maximum productivity and overly busy lives on the health of individuals, relationships and communities? What is the impact of governmental policies and new global trade agreements on the lives of people and the environment? And most importantly, how can ordinary people become involved in answering these questions?
How might global citizenship be taught?

Following the advice of John Dewey, education for global citizenship should be grounded in the personal experiences of the student and her/his community. As an example of connecting global issues with life experiences, Ryan and Durning (1997) invite readers of their book, Stuff: The Secret Lives of Everyday Things, to consider the impact of their daily consumption (and garbage) on the lives of other people and places in the world. Written like a story, the consumption of coffee, newspapers, t-shirts, shoes, car, computer, hamburger, french fries and cola are traced from their origins through the inequities of the production process to the consequences of waste products. Each short chapter ends with practical suggestions about what people can do in their daily lives to support a more sustainable and humane world.

Some teachers are leading the way. For example, one eighth-grade Spanish teacher explores global and social issues through “…the context of the lives of the speakers of these languages (by focusing) on Central America.” He introduces the issue of child labor by raising reflective questions: “Why do we rarely hear about these countries? Why are these countries so underdeveloped? What do the young people of these countries do? What is their future?” He uses the United Nations Rights of the Child document as the basis of discussions, stating,

Although some would suggest that such discussions do not belong in a language class, I maintain that language cannot be studied in a vacuum. The culture of the life of the child in the 1990’s is just as important as the culture of the life of the child in the Mayan times. Too often our curricula focus on the past, often presented in Disney-like terms, and ignore the bleak realities of today. Such instruction is deceitful and inadequate. It does not prepare the students to look the status quo head on and ask: Why? (Buggs, 1998, p.1)

Other teachers who see the need to prepare students with a global perspective have begun to develop curricula for teaching global citizenship. Amy Sanders, a high school teacher from Maine, has recently published a high school curriculum, Child Labor is Not Cheap (1997). The Resource Center of the Americas ( in Minneapolis specializes in teaching materials on Central and South America. Teaching for Change in Washington D.C. and United for a Fair Economy in Boston ( provide classroom resources and experiential exercises. Rethinking Our Classrooms: Teaching for Equity and Justice (1994), written primarily by teachers, combines cutting edge pedagogical theory with practical classroom applications. While many of the articles address issues within the United States, several, like “Poverty and World Resources” (Hersh & Peterson, 1994, pp.92-93), reach out to connect global injustices with the policies of industrial countries. Rethinking Schools ( is currently writing a curriculum on global sweatshops. Danny Seo, who founded Earth 2000 for environmental and animal rights at age 12, provides a guide for other children in his book, Generation React: Activism for Beginners (1997). Stories of eighteen activist young people are available in Kids Explore Kids Who Make a Difference (1997).

Even though many schools avoid these issues, young people are very aware of them. When asked what concerns they have about the world today, students identify almost every significant issue. They are worried about the ozone layer, global warming, AIDS, racism, sexism, the rainforests, the treatment of animals, the extinction of species, violence in homes and communities, terrorism, genocide, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, poisons in the air, food and water and more. Even though they know very little about the global economy, they have heard of it and know that it means increased competition for fewer and fewer livable wage jobs. The information they do receive, from a sound bite on television or abbreviated article in the mainstream media, is fragmented, incomplete and de-emphasized.

Students should have the right to investigate, study and explore these issues as a normal part of their education. They should be able to investigate issues raised by contemporary social movements: simple living, vegetarianism, organic and natural foods, sustainable communities, livable wages, social justice and equality movements, democratizing science and technology, sustainable jobs, labor initiatives, curriculum transformation, service learning, socially responsible businesses and investments, challenges to global sweatshops, etc. These questions and topics can inspire young people to reflect on and become actively involved in making a better world, not as incidental subject matter, but as the primary focus of their educational experience.

Student interest and demand for globally responsible education can be documented. Two examples can be drawn from our own university. A minor program in Human Relations that addresses issues of diversity and global citizenship was developed in 1986. By 1994, this program was the largest minor among all the state universities and remains so today. When students sought opportunities for further study, four departments developed an interdisciplinary Master’s degree program in Social Responsibility, which attracted nearly fifty students in its first two years.

What is the connection between jobs and global citizenship?

In the context of global social responsibility, the issues of livelihood and work need to be examined. We in the industrial world associate survival with employment. This association is being forced on other cultures as the global economy establishes dominance. But we must not forget that employment for survival is a relatively recent concept. It has not always been this way, and there are still parts of the world where survival is not based on working for someone seeking a profit from the labor of others. The conflicting educational purposes of jobs vs. citizenship can be alleviated if we encourage students to consider the social and environmental impact of the work they do. Jobs need not be about extraction, devastation, pollution, over-consumption or exploitation. It is important to remember that for thousands of years humans lived with sustainable relationships to nature and only spent a few hours of every day for their own subsistence. One of the purposes of technology was to save labor. By doing so, technology has been used to eliminate people’s livelihood, i.e. their jobs. Instead, it could be used to simply reduce the amount of time people have to work to support themselves and their families.

Science and technology could be used to preserve the earth instead of destroying it. Education should develop citizens who can critically evaluate the impact of human projects on other human beings, other species, and the environment. Education could teach active skills in influencing the direction of policies and practices. As one example, students at Humboldt State University initiated a graduation pledge in relation to jobs which has been adopted at colleges and universities across the nation. Stated simply, it says, “I pledge to explore and take into account the social and environmental consequences of any job I consider or any organization for which I work” ( Student Pugwash USA encourages another pledge campaign:

I promise to work for a better world, where science and technology are used in socially responsible ways. I will not use my education for any purpose intended to harm human beings or the environment. Throughout my career, I will consider the ethical implications of my work before I take action. While the demands placed upon me may be great, I sign this declaration because I recognize that individual responsibility is the first step on the path to peace.Since educational institutions are not adequately meeting student demands for global citizenship, hundreds of organizations are working to provide information and resources. Student Pugwash USA publishes a book complementary to its pledge, Jobs You Can Live With: Working at the Crossroads of Science, Technology and Society, for people wanting jobs which will “…make the world safe, sustainable, and peaceful (Higman, 1996, p. i).” The AFL/CIO, Steelworkers and other unions have initiated Union Summer internships to teach students about worker’s rights in a global context. Second Nature, founded by an alliance of educators and policymakers, has the goal of helping “…higher education teach and practice how to achieve a sustainable relationship between humans and the environment so that the health, social, and economic needs of all current and future generations can be met” (

A recent article to teachers from the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development on Global Education states,

…teachers can approach global education from different perspectives, says Merry Merryfield, associate professor of social studies and global education at The Ohio State University. For example, “some teachers have the rationale that, in order to compete in a global economy, students need a global perspective…but others want to make the world a better place in terms of the environment and social justice. Still others want to promote cross-cultural understanding.” Each of these is a valid approach, says Merryfield, as long as teachers emphasize multiple perspectives and global interdependence. (Rasmussen, 1998, p.2)Given the fragile state of the world and the level of continued destruction, we would argue that the approach does make a difference. We believe that the primary purpose of education is not to enhance the profits of global corporations, nor even to get students jobs. We believe the primary purpose is to prepare students to become stewards of the earth and participants in democracy for global social justice. Jobs or other means of livelihood need to be explored in this context.

What are the benefits of teaching global citizenship?

There are many benefits to teaching about global citizenship which reflect the position of this paper. Who could deny the importance of a safer, healthier, more peaceful, more just and sustainable world in which to live? In addition to these obvious long-term benefits to the world, there are also immediate benefits. Studying global problems and the various strategies for addressing them can generate a renewed sense of hope and optimism. Practicing active citizenship whether through personal changes, service learning, grassroots organizing, or a myriad of other activities, can provide meaning to the curriculum. Students will feel comfortable interacting with diverse groups of people. Students and teachers alike can see that they can make an impact to make the world a better place, far beyond the individualistic goal of getting a job. Students will understand more clearly what citizenship means and feel ready to make significant contributions for humankind in a sustainable environment.

During this period of educational upheaval, educators and policymakers alike have an opportunity to dramatically change the nature of education—regardless of our discipline or position in the educational system. We can make a tremendous difference to the entire social world and the preservation of the earth for subsequent generations if we reprioritize education for global citizenship. In the words of John Dewey, “As a society becomes more enlightened, it realizes that it is responsible not to transmit and conserve the whole of its existing achievements, but only such as make for a better future society. The school is the chief agency for the accomplishment of this end” (1916: 20).

Notes*The authors served on a broad-based multi-disciplinary faculty committee that met weekly for a year to develop a general education core course on Citizenship and Democracy at our university. Although this final description was overwhelmingly accepted by the vote of the entire faculty senate, a traditional course was put in its place. A few progressive departments have been able to integrate some of the original concepts into their courses.


About the Authors:

Julie Andrzejewski is a professor in the Department of Human Relations and Multicultural Education at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota. She has authored and directed several grant projects including: Responsible Citizenship in a Democracy, Global Understanding and Multicultural Perspectives, the Women Scholars of Color Project and the Citizenship for Diversity Project, an educational model program to prevent harassment and hate crimes on campus. She is the editor of Oppression and Social Justice: Critical Frameworks (5th edition) and co-author of Why Can’t Sharon Kowalski Come Home?

John Alessio is a professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at St. Cloud State University. He authored and directed a grant project on curriculum transformation entitled Critical Thinking Through Critique and has initiated other projects for cultural diversity, institutional change and advocacy for excluded groups. He has written and presented articles on issues of social exchange theory, equity theory, sex discrimination and labor, a number of which have been published in journals such as: Social Psychology Quarterly, Journal of Marriage and Family, Transformations, and Social Forces. Dr. Alessio initiated a Master’s degree in Social Responsibility at St. Cloud State University and co-developed the program with Dr. Andrzejewski. The program was approved in 1997.

ReferencesAndrzejewski, J. (1996) “Knowledge and Skills for Social and Environmental Justice” in Oppression and Social Justice: Critical Frameworks, Ed. Andrzejewski, J. Needham Heights, MA: Simon and Schuster, pp. 3-9.

Barlow, M. and H-J. Robertson. (1994) Class Warfare: The Assault on Canada’s Schools. Toronto: Key Porter Books.

Berliner, D and B. Biddle (1995) The Manufacture Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on America’s Public Schools, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

Bigelow, B., and L. Christensen, S. Karp, B. Miner and B. Peterson (1994) Rethinking Our Classrooms Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools.

Boehm, R. and C. Hoone, T. McGowan, M. McKinney-Browning, O. Miramontes (1997) Living in Our World New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.

Buggs, R. (1998) Child Labor Component in the Twelve-Week Spanish Introductory Class American Education Research Association proposal component.

Charnes, R. (1984) “U.S. History Textbooks: Help or Hindrance to Social Justice?” Interracial Books For Children Bulletin , No. 15. New York: Council on Interracial Books for Children.

Dewey, J. (1916) Democracy and Education New York: The Free Press.

Draper, N. (July 8, 1998) “Are schools selling out to business ties?” Star Tribune .

Faber, D. (1998) The Struggle for Ecological Democracy: Environmental Justice Movements in the United States New York: The Guilford Press.

Fitzgerald, F. (1979) America Revised New York: Vintage Books.

Gardner, G. & J. Perry (Sept/Oct 1995) “Big Dam Construction Is On the Rise” Worldwatch , Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 36-37.

Graduation Pledge Alliance (1998)

Goodlad, J. (1983), A Place Called School, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Harding, S. ed. (1993) The Racial Economy of Science , Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Hersh, S. & B. Peterson (1994) “Poverty and World Resources” in Rethinking Our Classrooms Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools.

Higman, S. ed. (1996) Jobs You Can Live With: Working at the Crossroads of Science, Technology, and Society, Washington D. C.: Student Pugwash USA.

Hotakainen, R. (July 8, 1998) “Charter school concept in Minnesota wins key vote” Star Tribune .

Lively, Kit (Judy 31, 1998) “States Move to Toughen Standards for Teacher-Education Programs” Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. XLIV, No. 47.

Loewen, J. W. (1995) Lies My Teacher Told Me , New York: The New Press.

Lowe, & Miner (1996) Selling Out Our Schools: Vouchers, Markets and the Future of Public Education Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools.

Jacobson, M. and L. Lefferts, A. Garland (1991) Safe Food: Eating Wisely in a Risky World Los Angeles: Living Planet Press.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996) What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future, Summary Report , New York.

Newsday (August 12, 1998) “Sympathy for U.S. is Waning Among Grieving Kenyans: Many say Americans acted callously during rescue and with travel advisory” Star Tribune .

O’Meara, M. (1997) “The Risks of Disrupting Climate” Worldwatch , Vol 10, No. 6, November/December, pp 10-24.

Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch (1997) (

Rasmussen, K. (Summer, 1998) “Making Connections Through Global Education” Curriculum Update, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Resource Center of the Americas (1998) (

Rethinking Schools (1998) (

St. Cloud State University General Education Subcommittee on Citizenship and Democracy, unpublished report, 1997.

Sachs, A. (1995) Eco-Justice: Linking Human Rights and the Environment Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, p. 1-2.

Sachs, A. (May/June, 1996) “Dying for Oil” Worldwatch, Vol. 9, No. 4, p. 11.

Sanders, A. (1997) Child Labor is Not Cheap , Minneapolis: Resource Center of the Americas, p. 3.

Schardt, D. & S. Schmidt (June 1998) “Seafood on the Skids” Nutrition Action , Vol 25, No. 5, pp. 3-8.

Second Nature (1998) (

Seo, D. (1997) Generation React: Activism for Beginners New York: Ballentine.

Shiva, V. (1997) Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge Boston: South End Press.

Smith, D. G. (1998) “Economic Fundamentalism, Globalization, and the Public Remains of Education” (unpublished paper) Alberta, Canada: Centre for the Study of Pedagogy and Culture.

United for a Fair Economy in Boston (

Westridge Young Writers Workshop (1997) Kids Explore Eids Who Make A Difference Santa Fe: John Muir Publications.

Zinn, H. (1995) A People’s History of the United States , New York: Harper Perennial.


A Global Citizen – To be or not to be | Corpus GREAT Institutes


A Global Citizen is someone who identifies with being part of an emerging world community and whose actions contribute to building this community’s values and practices.”

To test the validity of this definition we examine its basic assumptions: (a) that there is such a thing as an emerging world community with which people can identify; and (b) that such a community has a nascent set of values and practices.

Historically, human beings have always formed communities based on shared identity. Such identity gets forged in response to a variety of human needs— economic, political, religious and social. As group identities grow stronger, those who hold them organize into communities, articulate their shared values, and build governance structures to support their beliefs.

Today, the forces of global engagement are helping some people identify as global citizens who have a sense of belonging to a world community. This growing global identity in large part is made possible by the forces of modern information, communications and transportation technologies.  In increasing ways these technologies are strengthening our ability to connect to the rest of the world—through the Internet; through participation in the global economy; through the ways in which world-wide environmental factors play havoc with our lives; through the empathy we feel when we see pictures of humanitarian disasters in other countries; or through the ease with which we can travel and visit other parts of the world.

Those of us who see ourselves as global citizens are not abandoning other identities, such as  allegiances to our countries,  ethnicities and political beliefs. These traditional identities give meaning to our lives and will continue to help shape who we are. However, as a result of living in a globalized world, we understand that we have an added layer of  responsibility; we also are responsible for being members of a world-wide community of people who share the same global identity that we have.

We may not yet be fully awakened to this new layer of responsibility, but it is there waiting to be grasped. The major challengethat we face in the new millennium is to embrace our global way of being and build a sustainable values-based world community.

What might our community’s values be? They are the values that world leaders have been advocating for the past 70 years and include human rights, environmental protection, religious pluralism, gender equity, sustainable worldwide economic growth, poverty alleviation, prevention of conflicts between countries, elimination of weapons of mass destruction, humanitarian assistance and preservation of cultural diversity.

Since World War II, efforts have been undertaken to develop global policies and institutional structures that can support these enduring values. These efforts have been made by international organizations, sovereign states, transnational corporations, international professional associations and others. They have resulted in a growing body of international agreements, treaties, legal statutes and technical standards.

Yet despite these efforts we have a long way to go before there is a global policy and institutional infrastructure that can support the emerging world community and the values it stands for. There are significant gaps of policy in many domains, large questions about how to get countries and organizations to comply with existing policy frameworks, issues of accountability and transparency and, most important of all from a global citizenship perspective, an absence of mechanisms that enable greater citizen participation in the institutions of global governance.

The Global Citizens’ Initiative sees the need for a cadre of citizen leaders who can play activist roles in efforts to build our emerging world community. Such global citizenship activism can take many forms, including advocating, at the local and global level for policy and programmatic solutions that address global problems; participating in the decision-making processes of global governance organizations; adopting and promoting changes in behavior that help protect the earth’s environment; contributing to world-wide humanitarian relief efforts; and organizing events that celebrate the diversity in world music and art, culture and spiritual traditions.

Most of us on the path to global citizenship are still somewhereat the beginning of our journey. Our eyes have been opened and our consciousness raised. Instinctively, we feel a connection with others around the world yet we lack the adequate tools, resources, and support to act on our vision. Our ways of thinking and being are still coloured by the trapping of old allegiances and ways of seeing things that no longer are as valid as they used to be. There is a longing to pull back the veil that keeps us from more clearly seeing the world as a whole and finding more sustainable ways of connecting with those who share our common humanity.


Corpus GREAT Institutes Logo with Inscription2

What is Global Citizenship & Why it Matters in the 21st Century | Corpus GREAT Institutes

Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logo3


As Schattle (2009) points out, the concept of global citizenship is not a new one; it can be traced back to ancient Greece. But the concept and the term seem to have new currency and are now widely used in higher education. Many institutions cite global citizenship in their mission statements and/or as an outcome of liberal education and internationalization efforts. Many have “centers for global citizenship” or programs with this label.

Additionally, national and international organizations and networks have devoted themselves to helping institutions promote global citizenship, although they do not necessarily use that term. For example, the Association of American Colleges and Universities sponsors a series of programs concerned with civic learning, a broad concept that includes several goals for undergraduate education: strengthening U.S. democracy, preparing globally responsible citizenry, developing personal and social responsibility, and promoting global learning and diversity. The Salzburg Seminar’s International Study Program provides week-long workshops for faculty to consider the concepts of global citizenship and their integration into undergraduate education. It also provides college students with programs on global issues. The Talloires Network is an international alliance formed in 2005 that includes 202 institutions in 58 countries “devoted to strengthening the civic roles and social responsibilities of higher education.” The Talloires declaration refers specifically to “preparing students to contribute positively to local, national, and global communities.” Founded in 1985, the oldest of these networks, Campus Compact, retains its predominant, but not exclusive, focus on the United States.

Defining Global Citizenship

A foray into the literature or a look at the many ways colleges and universities talk about global citizenship reveals how broad a concept it is and how different the emphasis can be depending on who uses the term. This essay can only outline a few important elements of global citizenship, but a brief overview of the many meanings should help institutions formulate or clarify their own definition of it, identify those elements that are central to their educational vision, and add other dimensions. The following are among the most salient features of global citizenship (this section draws from a variety of sources but primarily relies on Schattle (2007)).

Global citizenship as a choice and a way of thinking. National citizenship is an accident of birth; global citizenship is different. It is a voluntary association with a concept that signifies “ways of thinking and living within multiple cross-cutting communities—cities, regions, states, nations, and international collectives…” (Schattle 2007, 9). People come to consider themselves as global citizens through different formative life experiences and have different interpretations of what it means to them. The practice of global citizenship is, for many, exercised primarily at home, through engagement in global issues or with different cultures in a local setting. For others, global citizenship means firsthand experience with different countries, peoples, and cultures. For most, there exists a connection between the global and the local. Whatever an individual’s particular “take” on global citizenship may be, that person makes a choice in whether or how to practice it.

Global citizenship as self-awareness and awareness of others. As one international educator put it, it is difficult to teach intercultural understanding to students who are unaware they, too, live in a culture that colors their perceptions. Thus, awareness of the world around each student begins with self-awareness. Self-awareness also enables students to identify with the universalities of the human experience, thus increasing their identification with fellow human beings and their sense of responsibility toward them.

Global citizenship as they practice cultural empathy. Cultural empathy or intercultural competence is commonly articulated as a goal of global education, and there is significant literature on these topics. Intercultural competence occupies a central position in higher education’s thinking about global citizenship and is seen as an important skill in the workplace. There are more than 30 instruments or inventories to assess intercultural competence. Cultural empathy helps people see questions from multiple perspectives and move deftly among cultures—sometimes navigating their own multiple cultural identities, sometimes moving out to experience unfamiliar cultures.

Global citizenship as the cultivation of principled decisionmaking. Global citizenship entails an awareness of the interdependence of individuals and systems and a sense of responsibility that follows from it. Navigating “the treacherous waters of our epic interdependence (Altinay 2010, 4) requires a set of guiding principles that will shape ethical and fair responses. Although the goal of undergraduate education should not be to impose a “correct” set of answers, critical thinking, cultural empathy, and ethical systems and choices are an essential foundation to principled decisionmaking.

Global citizenship as participation in the social and political life of one’s community. There are many different types of communities, from the local to the global, from religious to political groups. Global citizens feel a connection to their communities (however they define them) and translate that sense of connection into participation. Participation can take the form of making responsible personal choices (such as limiting fossil fuel consumption), voting, volunteering, advocacy, and political activism. The issues may include the environment, poverty, trade, health, and human rights. Participation is the action dimension of global citizenship.

Why Does Global Citizenship Matter?

The preceding list could be much longer and more detailed; global citizenship covers a lot of ground. Thus, it is useful to consider the term global citizenship as shorthand for the habits of mind and complex learning associated with global education. The concept is useful and important in several respects.

First, a focus on global citizenship puts the spotlight on why internationalization is central to a quality education and emphasizes that internationalization is a means, not an end. Serious consideration of the goals of internationalization makes student learning the key concern rather than counting inputs.

Second, the benefits of encouraging students to consider their responsibilities to their communities and to the world redound to them, institutions, and society. As Altinay (2010, 1) put it, “a university education which does not provide effective tools and forums for students to think through their responsibilities and rights as one of the several billions on planet Earth, and along the way develop their moral compass, would be a failure.” Strengthening institutional commitment to serving society enriches the institution, affirms its relevance and contributions to society, and benefits communities (however expansive the definition) and the lives of their members.

Third, the concept of global citizenship creates conceptual and practical connections rather than cleavages. The commonalities between what happens at home and “over there” become visible. The characteristics that human beings share are balanced against the differences that are so conspicuous. On a practical level, global citizenship provides a concept that can create bridges between the work of internationalization and multicultural education. Although these efforts have different histories and trajectories, they also share important goals of cultural empathy and intercultural competence (Olson et al. 2007).

No concept or term is trouble-free; no idea goes uncontested by some faculty member or group. For better or for worse, global citizenship will undoubtedly provoke disagreements that reflect larger academic and philosophical debates. There is plenty of skepticism about global citizenship. Some object to any concept that suggests a diminished role for the nation and allegiance to it or the ascendancy of global governance systems. The idea of developing students’ moral compasses can raise questions about whose values and morals and how institutions undertake this delicate task. Some students will choose not to accept responsibility for the fate of others far away, or may see inequality as an irremediable fact of life. Some faculty will stand by the efficacy and wisdom of the market; others will see redressing inequality as the key issue for the future of humankind. And so on.

Such debates, sometimes civil or acrimonious, are, for better or worse, the stuff of academe. Implementing new ideas—even if they have been around for a very long time as in the case of global citizenship—can be slow and painful. However, if colleges and universities can produce graduates with the knowledge and the disposition to be global citizens, the world would certainly be a better place.

Madeleine F. Green

Box 1 — Conceptual Divides

What was once simply called “international education” is now a field awash with varied terminology, different conceptual frameworks, goals, and underlying assumptions.*

Although “internationalization” is widely used, many use globalization—with all its different definitions and connotations— in its stead. Rather than take on the job of sorting out the terminology, let me point out two significant conceptual divides in the conversation. Both center on the purpose of internationalization.

In the first divide, we see one face of internationalization as referring to a series of activities closely associated with institutional prestige, profile, and revenue. These activities are generally quantifiable, lend themselves to institutional comparisons and benchmarking, and provide metrics for internationalization performance that resonate with trustees and presidents. Examples include hosting international students, sending students abroad, developing international agreements, and delivering programs abroad.

The other face of internationalization—student learning— is much more difficult to capture and assess, but it provides an important answer to the “so what?” question. Why does internationalization matter? What impact do internationalization activities have on student learning? How do they contribute to preparing students to live and work in a globalized and culturally diverse world?

Different terms with overlapping meanings are used to describe the student learning dimension of internationalization. Global learning, global education, and global competence are familiar terms; they, too, are often used synonymously. The global in all three terms often includes the concepts of international (between and among nations), global (transcending national borders), and intercultural (referring often to cultural differences at home and around the world).

Also prevalent in the student learning discussion is another cluster of terms that focus specifically on deepening students’ understanding of global issues and interdependence, and encouraging them to engage socially and politically to address societal issues. These terms include global citizenship, world citizenship (Nussbaum 1997), civic learning, civic engagement, and global civics (Altinay 2010). These terms, too, share several key concepts, and are often used interchangeably.

The second divide focuses on the divergent, but not incompatible goals of workforce development (developing workers to compete in the global marketplace) or as a means of social development (developing globally competent citizens.) Global competitiveness is primarily associated with mastery of math, science, technology, and occasionally language competence, whereas “global competence” (a broad term, to be sure), puts greater emphasis on intercultural understanding and knowledge of global systems and issues, culture, and language.

As the field grows increasingly complex and the instrumental goals of internationalization become more prominent, it is important that campus discussions and planning efforts sort out their language, underlying concepts, and implied or explicit values. Otherwise, people run the risk of talking past each other and developing strategies that may not match their goals.

*It is important for U.S. readers to note that the goals of and assumptions about internationalization vary widely around the world. The Third Global Survey of Internationalization conducted by the International Association of Universities found that there are divergent views among institutions in different regions of the risks and benefits of internationalizations. Based on their findings, IAU has launched an initiative to take a fresh look at internationalization from a global perspective.


Altinay, Hakan. “The Case for Global Civics.” Global Economy and Development Working Paper 35, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 2010.

Nussbaum, Martha. 1997. Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.

Olson, Christa, Rhodri Evans, and Robert Shoenberg. 2007. At Home in the World: Bridging the Gap Between Internationalization and Multi-Cultural Education. Washington DC: American Council on Education.

Schattle, Hans. 2007. The Practices of Global Citizenship . Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Schattle, Hans. 2009. “Global Citizenship in Theory and Practice.” In The Handbook of Practice and Research in Study Abroad:Higher Education and the Quest for Global Citizenship, ed. R. Lewin. New York: Routledge.


Corpus GREAT Institutes Logo with Inscription2

Are Stocks 80% Overvalued? New Evidence Shocks Wall Street | Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation

Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logos5

Several noted economists and distinguished investors are warning of a 50% stock market crash.

Billionaire Carl Icahn, for example, recently threw up a red flag on national broadcast when he declared, “The public is walking into a trap again as they did in 2007.”

Unfortunately, Icahn’s warning is tame compared to his peers.

“U.S. stocks are now about 80% overvalued,” says Andrew Smithers, the chairman of Smithers & Co. He backs up his prediction using a ratio which proves that the only time in history stocks were this risky was 1929 and 1999. And we all know what happened next. Stocks fell by 89% and 50%, respectively.

This simple sandcastle analogy proves an economic collapse is imminent. Click here to see how...

Even the Royal Bank of Scotland says the markets are flashing stress alerts akin to the 2008 crisis. They told their clients to “Sell Everything” because “in a crowded hall, the exit doors are small.”

Stocks like Apple, will plunge.

But there is one distinct warning that should send chills down your spine … that of James Dale Davidson.

As a renowned economist, best-selling author, and founder of Strategic Investment, Davidson makes the strongest case for a looming crisis — “Right now, there are three key economic indicators screaming SELL. They don’t imply that a 50% collapse is looming, it’s already at our doorstep.”

Editor’s Note: Click Here to See the 3 Indicators That Prove a 50% Stock Market Collapse is Looming.

Davidson’s warning is the most alarming of all his peers.

Not just because he makes the strongest case for a collapse (he uses over 20 unquestionable charts to prove his point), but also because Davidson has a remarkable track record of calling every major economic shift over the last three decades. For example, Davidson predicted the collapse of 1999 and 2007, along with the fall of the Soviet Union and Japan’s economic downfall, to name just a few.

 His predictions are so accurate, he’s been invited to shake hands and counsel the likes of former presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton — and he’s had the good fortune to befriend and convene with George Bush Sr., Steve Forbes, Donald Trump, Margaret Thatcher, Sir Roger Douglas and even Boris Yeltsin.

Hence, if Davidson calls for a 50% market correction, one should pay heed.

Davidson goes on to say, “I know that everywhere you turn things look pretty good. The market is near all-time highs, the dollar is strong, and real estate is booming again. But remember, the exact same scenario played out in 1999 and 2007. The economy is unraveling right now, and fast. Very fast.”

However, it’s not just a 50% stock market collapse that Davidson is warning about. He also predicts that “real estate will plummet by 40%, savings accounts will lose 30%, and unemployment will triple.” (To see Davidson’s research behind these predictions, click here.)

“I am not a man who likes to preach doom,” Davidson reminded me.

Indeed, during his career, he’s made investment recommendations that have spun off a good deal of money … like the $10 million windfall he banked in a natural-resource company, and the time he told people to scoop up Philip Morris for gains of 405%.

And although our future may seem bleak, as Davidson says, “There is no need to fall victim to the future. If you are on the right side of what’s ahead, you could seize opportunities that come along once, maybe twice, in a lifetime.”

In a new video presentation Davidson not only explains exactly why the economy is already collapsing, but also reveals what he and his family are doing to prepare right now. (It’s unconventional and even controversial, but proven to work.)

While Davidson intended the video for a private audience only, original viewers leaked it out and now tens of thousands are downloading the video every day.

One anonymous viewer wrote “Davidson uses clear evidence that spells out the looming collapse, and he does it in a simple language that anyone can understand.”

Indeed, Davidson uses a sandcastle, a $5 bill, and straightforward analogies to prove his points.

With his permission, I reposted the video on a private website.


Corpus GREAT Foundation for Economics - Corpus GREAT Economics Foundation

Death row gran Lindsay Sandiford ‘to go before firing squad’ – despite PM’s David Camerons Plea | Corpus GREAT Institutes | Corpus GREAT Communications


Corpus GREAT Communications Logo2

Death row gran Lindsay Sandiford ‘to go before firing squad’ – despite PM’s plea

A BRIT gran sentenced to death in Indonesia could die within days.

Lindsay Sandiford

TERROR: Lindsay Sandiford faces being brought before a firing squad to be shot dead

Indonesian officials have announced another round of executions would go ahead in the next few months.

Lindsay Sandiford is on death row after she was rumbled smuggling 3.8 kilograms of cocaine when she arrived in the Indonesian island of Bali from Bangkok in 2012.

The 59-year-old admitted the offences – but claimed she was coerced by threats to her son’s life.

Lindsay Sandiford

DEATH ROW: Lindsay wants her executioner to look her in the face at the firing line

David Cameron discussed Sandiford’s case with President Jokowi of Indonesia in July.

But his mercy pleas appear to have fallen on deaf ears and she now faces execution.

Now Indonesian Attorney-General HM Prasetyo reportedly saying executions in the country were likely to start this year after a brief halt because of lack of cash.

Where British people are on prison

BANGED UP ABROAD: There are 81 Brits in prison in Thailand

“Knitting stops me from going insane”

Death row gran Lindsay Sandiford

Sandiford from Redcar, North Yorkshire, could now be shot within months, reports her local newspaper, the Middlesbrough Gazette.

The Guardian also reports a batch of state-sanctioned killings are set to go ahead.

The gran has been distracting herself from her horrific fate by teaching 20 other inmates to make teddy bears, jumpers and shawls.

“Knitting stops me from going insane,” she told the Mail on Sunday.

While Sandiford faces death at the end of a gun barrel, agreed to expel her from the country.

Saudi Arabia, 9/11, and the secret papers that could ignite a diplomatic war | Corpus GREAT Institutes | Corpus GREAT Communications

Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logos6



Twenty-eight secret pages of a report locked away in a room in the Capitol in Washington lie in the centre of a crisis between America and Saudi Arabia which threatens to have severe and widespread repercussions.

The US Congress is considering legislation which would enable the families of victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, presented by the West as its most valuable ally in the Middle East, over alleged links with al-Qaeda terrorists who carried out the attacks on New York and Washington.

The issue had cast a long shadow over the recent visit of President Barack Obama to Riyadh, with the Saudis threatening to sell off $750bn of American assets they hold if the bill is passed by Congress.

The classified pages are in a file titled “Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive Narrative Matters”, which have never been published from the findings of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into the attacks which killed 3,000 people and injured more than 6,000 others.

Former President George W Bush claimed the publication of this part of the report would damage America’s national security by revealing “sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the War on Terror”.

But there is growing clamour for declassification of the pages along with allegations about attempts by the Saudis to keep their alleged role in the attacks hidden. The latest public figure to demand disclosure was Rudi Giuliani, the mayor of New York at the time of the attacks.

A Saudi prince, claimed Mr Giuliani, had given him a cheque for $10m (£7m) in an effort to persuade him to deflect attention away from the Kingdom. The former mayor said he returned the cheque after tearing it up. He declared: “His money he can keep and go burn it in hell. The American people need to know exactly what was the role of the Saudi Arabia government in the attacks: we are entitled to know who killed our loved ones and who almost killed us all.”

It was reported on Sunday that White House House officials have said privately that at least some of the 28 pages will be made public.

And former Democratic Senator Bob Graham, the former head of the Senate intelligence committee, reiterated his belief that Saudi Arabia was involved in the attacks at the highest level. He said “The most important unanswered question of 9/11 is: did these 19 people conduct this very sophisticated plot alone, or were they supported? So who was the most likely entity to have provided them that support? I think all the evidence points to Saudi Arabia. I think it covers a broad range, from the highest ranks of the Kingdom through these, what would be private entities.”

Two Congressmen, both of whom have seen the secret document, are behind the bipartisan motion for declassification. Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts Democrat, held that the report offers evidence of links between “certain Saudi individuals” and the terrorists behind the 2001 attacks. Walter Jones, a Republican, said it also sheds light on why President Bush was so opposed to publication : “It’s about the Bush administration and its relationship with the Saudis.”

The allegations of Saudi involvement in the attacks come against a backdrop of the ultra-conservative Kingdom’s funding violent Islamist groups, often with the encouragement and support of the West. This continues now with accusations that the Saudis have supplied money and arms to the most extreme of the rebels fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

The current round of exporting hardline, obscurantist Sunni doctrine from Saudi Arabia is traced back to 1992 when the country’s senior Wahaabi clerics issued a Memorandum of Advice to the royal family effectively threatening a putsch unless they were allowed to play a central role of the policies of the Kingdom both home and abroad.

The royal family felt unable to resist the demands and a key move in facilitating this was the creation of the Wahaabi dominated Ministry of Islamic Affairs, with representatives in Saudi embassies and consulates. The alleged links of the Ministry’s officials to the September 11 plotters is a key claim in the projected lawsuit.

Mr Giuliani’s charge of attempted bribery against the Saudi prince came a day after it was revealed that the flight certificate of an al-Qaeda bombmaker named Ghassan Al-Sharbi, who had taken flying lessons for the September 11 mission, was found in an envelope stashed away at the Saudi embassy in Washington.

The certificate, along with other documents was found at the embassy during investigations after he was captured in 2002 in Pakistan, which has become a conduit for Wahaabi-funded terrorism.

Al-Sharbi, who had not taken part in the September 11 attacks, has been held since at Guantanamo Bay. An official memo about the licence, called Document 17, written in 2003, was quietly declassified last year but did not come to public awareness until an activist, Brian McGlinchey, discovered and published it in his blog last week.

There was also a connection, it has emerged, between the Kingdom’s legations in America to two Saudis, Nawaf al-Hamzi and Khalid al-Mindhar, who had arrived in the US in 2000 as the part of the first wave of September 11 hijackers.

The two men were set up in an apartment in San Diego by Omar al-Bayoumi, a fellow Saudi, who also helped them with social security paperwork and information about flying courses. There were reports that he also introduced them to an imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who later became known as the “Bin Laden of the internet” and was killed in an American drone strike in Yemen.

Al-Bayoumi received Saudi government funding for his stay in the US through a Saudi aviation services company called Dallah Alco. He was listed in FBI files before the September 11 attacks as a Saudi agent (something the authorities in the Kingdom deny) and was a frequent visitor to the Kingdom’s Washington embassy and consulate in Los Angeles.

Al-Bayoumi acknowledged to US investigators that he had an hour-long meeting with Fahad al-Thumairy, an official of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, who he described as his spiritual mentor at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles, the same day that he had met al-Hamzi and al-Mindhar. Two years later al-Thumairy was stripped of his diplomatic immunity and deported from the US because of suspected terrorist links.


World Trade Centre


Osama Basnan, another Saudi living in San Diego at the time, also spent time with the hijackers, al-Hamzi and al-Mihdhar. Basnan received around $75,000 from Princess Haifa bin Sultan, the wife of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the US. The money was said to be for medical treatment for Basnan’s wife. Some of it went to Al-Bayoumi. Basnan was arrested for visa fraud in August 2002 and deported two months later to Saudi Arabia.

The lawsuit being brought over alleged Saudi culpability claims that some of Princess Haifa’s money was used in the upkeep of the two hijackers in San Diego. The FBI maintains it has no evidence of this and the 9/11 Commission stated it had found no link between the attacks and the royal family.

Al-Bayoumi moved to the UK in July 2001 and began a PhD course in business management at Aston University in Birmingham. He was arrested ten days after the September 11 attacks by British police at the request of the FBI. However, the US authorities subsequently said they had found no link between him and terrorism. He was released, continued his studies at Aston and later moved back to Saudi Arabia. Under Congressional pressure the FBI later reopened the case, but stood by its previous decision.

In 2012 Prince Bandar was in the news over issues of terrorism. The Prince, by then the head of his country’s intelligence service, had been tasked by the Saudi King to organise the Syrian rebels. Bandar, at a meeting in Moscow, allegedly threatened Vladimir Putin that Chechen Islamists could be activated to carry out attacks on the upcoming Sochi Olympics unless the Russian president stopped his support for Assad.

Bandar was rebuffed by a furious Putin who threatened retaliation. Details of the meeting were leaked by the Kremlin, and the Prince was relieved of his Syrian responsibilities soon afterwards by the King.

The bank used by Prince Bandar’s wife to send her money was to became mired in controversy and fined for breaching money laundering regulations. It was found to have links with the CIA, with some of its officials having security clearance. The FBI discovered that a number of prominent Saudis holding accounts there with Prince Bandar a regular user.

Jonathan Bush, an uncle of George W Bush, was a senior executive af Riggs Bank. He helped bring in investors for George W Bush’s first oil venture, Arbusto. He was a major contributor and fundraiser to his nephew’s presidential campaign in 2000 and was named a “Bush Pioneer” for raising more than $100,000.

Jonathan Bush had been fined $30,000 in Massacheussets and a smaller sum in Connecticut in 1991 for violating registration laws on security sales in 1991. He was banned from security brokerage with the public for a year.

In May 2004 Riggs Bank was fined $25m by US authorities for violation of money laundering laws, it also agreed to pay $9m to victims of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet for illegally concealing and moving his funds out of the UK. In February 2005 PNC Financial Services acquired Riggs Bank and phased out the controversial embassy business.


David Cameron announces concessions on Syrian child refugees | Corpus GREAT Institutes | Corpus GREAT Communications


Corpus GREAT Institutes & Foundation - GREAT Ethical Corpus Logos6

David Cameron speaks during prime minister’s questions in the House of Commons on Wednesday.David Cameron speaks during prime minister’s questions in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

David Cameron has given in to calls for the UK to accept unaccompanied refugee children from Greece, Italy and France in a bid to avoid defeat in the House of Commons.

The prime minister climbed down in the face of a growing rebellion among Conservative MPs who were preparing to back an amendment by Labour peer Lord Dubs.

Confirming the U-turn, Cameron paid tribute to Dubs, who came to Britain as a refugee through the Kindertransport and had led the campaign for the UK to take 3,000 unaccompanied children from camps within Europe.

Dubs’s first attempt was voted down by Conservative MPs, but the peer resubmitted the amendment without a specific figure included and this will now be accepted by the government.

Downing Street could not say how many child refugees would be accepted under the new plans but a spokesman said the government would consult with councils about accepting under-16s who registered as unaccompanied refugees in Europe before 20 March.

The plan to accept only children already in Europe preserves Cameron’s principle of not creating a “pull factor” that would encourage parents to send their children on perilous journeys with people traffickers.

“No country has done more than Britain to help when it comes to Syrian refugees,” Cameron told MPs.

“But I do want us to proceed with as much support across the house as I can. I think it is right to stick to the principle that we shouldn’t be encouraging people to make this dangerous journey. I think it is right to stick to the idea that we invest in the refugee camps in the neighbouring countries.”

But he said that he was willing to speed up the process of taking child migrants with family links in the UK, and do more for children who arrived in the UK ahead of a deal between the EU and Turkey.

“It won’t be necessary to send the Dubs amendment back … the amendment doesn’t mention a number of people. We are going to go round the local authorities to see what we can do,” said Cameron.

But he insisted that he wanted the UK to stick to the principle that the priority was to take children from camps in the region from which they were fleeing – and not take children from European countries that ought to already to be a safe haven.

He said that “housing them, clothing them, feeding them” was today’s equivalent of the Kindertransport.

The intervention was immediately welcomed by the SNP’s Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, while a key Tory MP who was minded to vote with Dubs, Heidi Allen, tweeted her support.

Dubs also said he was pleased that Cameron was taking steps to “ease the plight of some of the unaccompanied child refugees in Europe”.

He added: “I trust the prime minister will be true to his word and move swiftly to ensure the Home Office works closely with local authorities to find foster families to give these young people a stable and secure home.”

However, Labour said the plan did not go far enough, with a spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn arguing that more than 3,000 child refugees should be welcomed to the UK.

Refugee and children’s rights groups were scrambling to clarify whether Cameron’s announcement referred to the speeding up of existing and legally binding processes to allow family reunification or whether it would lead to additional children being allowed into Britain from Europe.

A spokeswoman for Save the Children said that it expected further details from the government soon. She added: “We have spoken to various levels of government and various departments about the extreme risks that these children face – and where the UK can best intervene. This includes how the relocation of the most vulnerable children – which Save the Children has long called for – would work in practice.”

Tanya Steele, Save the Children’s chief executive,said the charity “welcome today’s significant announcement that the UK will offer them sanctuary and the chance to build a new life here.

“Refugee children, many of whom have fled war and persecution and have made dangerous journeys to Europe alone are now living on the streets, in overcrowded camps or locked in police detention.

“The prime minister has today offered a lifeline to these vulnerable children and we will work with the government and the UN to ensure that these commitments are rapidly implemented so that thousands of lone, vulnerable children can reach safety in the UK in the coming months.

“The UK government has today matched the great leadership they have shown in providing aid and support to Syrian refugees in the region by reaching out a hand to children already on European shores.

“This announcement echoes Britain’s proud history of offering safety at times of great crisis and we want to thank the members of parliament who have led the way in championing this cause, as well as the British public who have opened their hearts to refugee children.”

The first attempt to get Britain to take 3,000 child refugees from the EU was blocked in a Commons vote last Monday by a majority of 18. But a group of up to 30 Conservative MPs said they were ready to back the reworded amendment to the immigration bill next week.

The Home Office minister James Brokenshire was due to meet the Tory rebels on Wednesday afternoon in an attempt to reach a deal to avert a government defeat.

Allen, the Conservative MP for South Cambridgeshire, abstained in last week’s vote and had said she and others would defy the party whip if concessions were not offered.

Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme before the concessions were announced whether she and others would rebel if the government did not back down, Allen said: “Absolutely, 100%.”

She criticised Cameron’s claim that child refugees were out of danger once they reached Europe. She said: “The prime minister mentioned in PMQs last week ‘relative safety in Europe’. It is not relatively safe to be pulled into trafficking and prostitution. Talk to the doctors – Médecins Sans Frontières – they are literally stitching up children on a daily basis and sending them back to the camps. So these children are not safe at all and they need our help.”

Allen pointed out that at the last count 150 unaccompanied children at the makeshift “Jungle” refugee camp near Calais had relatives in the UK.

She said: “If we can establish where those children are and who they are, then the magical number of 3,000 almost becomes academic. It is about finding those who have the right to be here.”

Former shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper, who chairs Labour’s refugee task force, said ministers had shifted position because they feared a Commons defeat.

“We need to see real action to help child refugees who are at risk of abuse, exploitation and trafficking within Europe,” she said. “So far, ministers have only ever announced increased support when under serious political pressure – we will keep this up until next week’s vote.”


Corpus GREAT Communications Logo1

Barclays launches zero deposit deal for first-time home buyers | Corpus GREAT Communications


BarclaysFirst-time buyers will be able to get on to the property ladder without needing any deposit under a new deal launched by a major bank.

Barclays Mortgages has revamped its “family springboard” mortgage, removing the need for first-time buyers and home movers to put down any deposit at all when buying a home using this mortgage.

The deal has previously allowed people to climb on to the property ladder with a 5% deposit, provided that a “helper” – often the home buyer’s parents – puts cash equating to 10% of the house purchase price into a savings account linked to the mortgage.

Under the new deal, only the 10% contribution from parents is needed. This cash will be returned to the borrower’s parents after three years with interest added – provided the borrower has kept up with their mortgage repayments.

The lender has also raised the maximum amount that home buyers can potentially borrow as a multiple of their income under the deal.

Customers with an income of more than £50,000 will be able to borrow a maximum of 5.5 times their income, up from a maximum income multiple of 4.4.

Buyers can still put down the 5% deposit if they want to under the Barclays deal – and doing this will give them access to a slightly better mortgage rate.

A buyer with a deposit of zero could get a three-year fixed-rate of 2.99% under the family springboard mortgage, but one with a 5% deposit using the mortgage could get a cheaper three-year rate of 2.79%.

The revamp has also seen the rate on offer for people who do have a 5% deposit cut from 2.89% previously.

Parents putting cash into a savings account – called a “helpful start” account – will receive an interest rate of 2% (the Bank of England base rate plus 1.5% under the deal).

The need to raise a hefty mortgage deposit is often cited as a major barrier holding people back from getting on the property ladder.

The Government has introduced various schemes under the banner of Help to Buy, which enable people to move on to or up the property ladder with a 5% deposit. As well as offering the springboard mortgage, Barclays also takes part in Help to Buy.

Barclays said recent research found more than one third (35%) of prospective first-time buyers are forced into asking their parents for help getting a mortgage. Of these, one in five (20%) who accept help see the money as a “gift” that does not need to be paid back.

A separate survey from credit checking company Experian recently found more than one in four Britons aged 55 and over have given financial support to their child or someone else to help them buy their own property.

Some 27% of over-55s said they have done this – despite one in six (15%) of those who have supported someone else saying they are “not at all” financially comfortable themselves – Experian found.

Another report, from Legal and General, found the “bank of mum and dad” is expected to be involved in one in four (25%) property purchases in the UK housing market in 2016.

Rachel Springall, a spokeswoman for website, said that while some other lenders offer “guarantor” mortgages which are backed by a helper, Barclays’ large high street presence is likely to make it particularly attractive to those struggling to raise a deposit.

She said: “At 2.99% the three-year fixed mortgage is reasonably priced, but buyers must be aware that their parents or guardians must deposit the full 10% of the property price and they will not have access to this money for three years.

“Guarantor mortgages spread the risk among both the buyer and the depositors so they should not be taken on lightly.”

Ms Springall continued: “Anyone taking out a high loan-to-value deal would do well to make overpayments on the mortgage to reduce the loan and term of the mortgage.

“This way, when they look at re-mortgaging down the line, they will hopefully have more equity which means they will have more competitively priced deals to choose from at lower loan-to-values.”

Barclays weathers tough start to year
Corpus GREAT Communications Logo2