Descriptive analysis assessed GCED competencies in Filipino students, suggesting curriculum enhancements for better engagement.
This study examines the extent to which Filipino higher education students demonstrate Global Citizenship Education (GCED) competencies across the cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioral domains. It proposes an Integrated GCED Development Framework to address identified gaps. Grounded in the Philippine GCED framework and aligned with international benchmarks, the research utilized a descriptive quantitative design involving 234 undergraduate students from diverse academic programs—a validated 280-item instrument measured self-reported GCED competencies. Descriptive statistical analysis revealed that cognitive competencies were demonstrated to a moderate extent (M = 3.24, SD = 0.56), with strengths in evaluating credible information but limited proficiency in synthesizing multiple perspectives and recognizing complex global interdependencies. Socio-emotional competencies were exhibited to a great extent (M = 3.30, SD = 0.55), particularly in respect for cultural and spiritual diversity, although global self-efficacy and sustained dialogic engagement remained underdeveloped. Behavioral competencies were displayed to a moderate extent (M = 3.23, SD = 0.60), indicating strong ethical awareness but limited civic initiative and advocacy involvement. These findings underscore a persistent knowledge-to-action gap in GCED implementation. In response, the study introduces a context-responsive, three-pillar Integrated GCED Development Framework—Cognitive Empowerment, Socio-Emotional Cultivation, and Behavioral Engagement—designed to strengthen global citizenship competencies among Filipino learners holistically. The framework emphasizes interdisciplinary curriculum integration, dialogic and participatory pedagogies, and experiential learning initiatives. By providing empirical insights and actionable strategies, this research contributes to the enhancement of transformative GCED in Philippine higher education. It supports broader goals of education for sustainable development, peacebuilding, and global solidarity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John Cliford M. Alvero (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: