Introduction

Global citizenship education (GCED) is a strategic area of the United Nations Education Programme (2014–2017) and one of three priorities of the Global Education First Initiative launched by the United Nations Secretary-General in September 2012. The United Nations mandates are a gesture towards growing globalization and the goals of increasing global citizenship. As a result, scholars and educators pay a great deal of attention to the subject of GCED (Chiba et al., 2021; Deardorff, 2019; McLaren & Bosio, 2022; Mochizuki, 2019). Educators and educational institutions across the globe are embracing GCED to organize their curricula in a way that increases the interconnectedness of the world (Mochizuki, 2019).

Traditional ideas of citizenship have changed recently, as a result of the increasing intrusion of the concept of global citizenship into political and scholarly debate. Old notions of citizenship, inside a nation-state, are under critical discussion and have transformed amid globalization (Castles & Davidson, 2000). This has increased the challenges linked to global concerns and the post-national purpose of citizenship (Castles & Davidson, 2000). Clifford and Montgomery (2017) emphasise the important part universities play an in promoting global citizenship, because they internationalize their curricula and student bodies. However, it is not disputed that a country’s global competitiveness depends on how it responds educationally to the effects of globalization. According to Deardorff (2019), educators and decision-makers have the authority to guide and equip future generations to have a constructive impact on the world. We should therefore concentrate on educating students in the essential skills they need to accomplish their goals and overcome the difficulties the world presents (Mochizuki, 2019). Thus, there is a pressing need to adopt global education programmes in schools which emphasise developing global competency and creating global citizens (Deardorff, 2019).

In 1971, Qatar proclaimed its independence. In 1977, Qatar University was created. There has been little research since then to assess how conscious Qatari youth are of global citizenship. This article investigates the level of GCED among Qatar University students and whether the university instils the idea of global citizenship in its students.

Problem statement

In order to promote and execute global citizenship in educational contexts, several deliberate acts are needed. According to Buzdar et al. (2019), one of the numerous difficulties colleges and universities face is getting rid of old customs. Another issue is handling traditional methods of education using current justifications that fit accelerating worldwide development (Buzdar et al., 2019). There needs to be a paradigm shift from the local or regional mindset to the global mindset, from static positioning to a changing competitive world, and from traditional management styles to unusual leadership styles comprising cooperative teams which strive to achieve entrepreneurship roles. As a result, it is necessary to produce global individuals who can keep up with the pace of the changing world. It is also important to prepare a tech-savvy generation which respects human rights and is able to negotiate conflict. We need to develop individuals who can handle, and communicate in terms of, culture, colour and religion. This study examines the degree of global citizenship abilities among students at Qatar University, taking all these objectives into account, and considering numerous studies that highlight the challenges associated with raising global citizens.

Significance of the study

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4.7 aims to “ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and culture’s contribution to sustainable development” (UNESCO 66129 (2015), p.20).

This has drawn the attention of practitioners and researchers in education (Chiba et al., 2021). However, with the rapidly changing times and from the perspective of Arab countries, there is scant structured research available focusing on this field (Akkari & Maleq, 2020; Al’Abri et al., 2022). Al’Abri et al. (2022) argue that the concept of global citizenship has gained momentum in the Arab world as part of 21st century skills. However, introducing GCED into curricula and defining its purpose is still rare, and faculty, teachers and other educators have enormous difficulties trying to teach citizenship to students who are digital natives.

Several studies explore the fulfilment of GCED in Qatar based on literature analysis and policies (Pal, 2021; Sever & Tok, 2023; Zguir et al., 2021). There are many essential ways to support global citizenship among Qatari university students. For instance, there is a need for research to understand the level of global citizenship awareness among students before designing a framework for how colleges and universities should provide GCED.

The findings of this study should expand the knowledge of researchers globally, enabling them to comprehend the current state of GCED from the Gulf (Arab) countries’ perspective. It should help policymakers in Arab countries as a whole, and Gulf countries in particular, to better understand their youths’ understanding of global citizenship. Most importantly, this research is significant for faculty, teachers, educators, administrators and policymakers in academic settings.

Purpose of the study

Exploring the level of global citizenship of Qatar University students serves several purposes. Firstly, it provides a theoretical and intellectual basis for global citizenship in the contemporary sociological and educational literature. Secondly, it identifies and articulates Qatar University students’ concepts of global citizenship skills, which includes their feelings about belonging to a global community and their responsibility to contribute to the well-being of that community. It provides a framework, consisting of social responsibility, global competence and global civic engagement (Morais & Ogden, 2011), for understanding various levels of global citizenship from a Gulf viewpoint. Additionally, exploring global citizenship raises awareness and provides suggestions for faculty, teachers, educators, administrators and policymakers to get involved and making a difference in education policies, teaching strategies and training and development frameworks.

Research questions

This research addresses three research questions (RQs):

RQ1. What is the level of global citizenship skills of Qatar University students?

RQ2. Based on the relationship between the demographic factors (gender, nationality, age, occupation, family origin, academic year, college, income) and the three dependent variables (social responsibility, global competence, global civic engagement), what are the differences in global citizenship skills among Qatar University students?

RQ3. How are social responsibility, global competence, and global civic engagement related to global citizenship, the independent variable?

Theoretical Framework and Literature Review

Global Citizenship

Global citizenship refers to the idea that people and communities have a sense of belonging and responsibility towards the wider world, beyond their own local, national or cultural boundaries (Dower, 2003; Schattle, 2008). It is based on the belief that we all share a common humanity and have a collective responsibility to work towards a more just, peaceful, and sustainable world (Cabrera, 2010; Dower, 2003).

Global citizenship includes the recognition and appreciation of diversity, understanding and respecting other viewpoints, and actively engaging with global issues and challenges, such as poverty, inequality, climate change and human rights. It also entails taking action to address these issues, either through personal choices, community initiatives or advocacy and activism (Schattle, 2008).

In recent decades, the link between the nation-state and citizenship has weakened, due to the creation of the narrative of ‘one people, one state’, as well as a number of other elements such as power, control and supremacy (Castles & Davidson, 2000). Rathburn, Lexier (2016) make the case that people not only have the rights and obligations that come with being a citizen of a certain nation-state, but there are universal human rights and moral obligations that apply to everyone. Due to global exposure and connectedness, these contradictions and ambiguities reveal the theoretical aspects of a new idea of citizenship in relation to the broader world (Castles & Davidson, 2000). Therefore, citizenship theory and practice coincide with globalization, leading to the concept of global citizenship (Cabrera, 2010). This idea justifies a shared reliance on the world and shared accountability for finding solutions to world issues (Aydin & Cinkaya, 2018; Carabain et al., 2012). However, the idea that the nation-state is the only source of citizenship rights is dangerous because the new global community extends beyond the nation-state and promotes the creation of a new narrative of the world as one ‘nation’ (Grimwood, 2018; Isin & Turner, 2002).

Globalization and Global Citizenship

Grimwood (2018) and O’Byrne (2004) define globalization as the significant growth of global culture and its proximity to the exchange of resources, including ideologies and human resources. People are learning the value of global citizenship because of globalization. Castles and Davidson (2000) point out three important aspects of globalization that affect nations. Firstly, globalization challenges the idea of a nation or states’ relative autonomy on which national citizenship centres and breaks the belief in territory or place as the nexus and power. Secondly, it destabilizes the ideology of distinct and independent national cultures. Thirdly, and most importantly, globalization means the quick and progressive movement of people through borders. Castles and Davidson (2000), after arguing the concept of cultural essentialism, point out that the single and individual citizenship of the state is no longer sufficient in the contemporary world, as the model of the state is being seriously challenged. They state that a new form of citizenship is needed to respond to globalization and cultural diversity.

The phrase ‘global citizenship’ has its roots in an archaic cosmopolitan notion which refers to a worldwide citizen (Hartung, 2017; Lettevall & Klockar Linder, 2008). Global citizenship is defined as acting with consideration and understanding of cultural variety, and support for social justice (Buzdar et al., 2019; Reysen & Katzarska-Miller, 2013). It is a requirement that people recognize each other’s existence, because representatives of a global community may not be constrained by national boundaries (Hartung, 2017). A normative ethical framework needs to be established to make it legal and feasible to seek to increase power and inclusion, wherein citizenship arises from diversity rather than being a formal tool restricted to certain groups (Aydin & Cinkaya, 2018). Therefore, because of the ongoing, and increasingly worldwide, changes to the political context, the way people perceive citizenship is profoundly changed.

Global Citizenship in Arab Countries

Global citizenship is complex in Arab countries and differs from country to country and from context to context (Goren & Yemini, 2017). On one hand, the importance of GCED is increasing, and is recognized to promote people in the region’s sense of global responsibility (Abdellatif et al., 2019; Kiwan, 2014). Moreover, it reflects initiatives that promote global values and skills. Intercultural dialogue, human rights education and environmental sustainability are among the many topics on the agenda (Al’Abri et al., 2022). On the other hand, the dominant discourse of nationalism and cultural essentialism in some parts of the Arab world tends to prioritize national identity over global citizenship (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Gani, 2019).

Despite these challenges, there are numerous examples of individuals and groups in the Arab world actively engaged in global citizenship practices, such as volunteering, advocacy and social entrepreneurship. For instance, Alwan wa Awtar is a Lebanese social enterprise that uses art and music to promote social cohesion and intercultural dialogue among young people in Lebanon and beyond. The organization provides music and art workshops, as well as cultural exchange programmes, to bring together youth from various backgrounds and promote a sense of global citizenship. Teach for Qatar is a programme that recruits young professionals to teach in underprivileged schools in Qatar, with the aim of improving educational outcomes and promoting social justice. The programme provides training and support to teachers, as well as opportunities for professional development and networking. Green the Camps is a Palestinian initiative that promotes environmental sustainability and social entrepreneurship in refugee camps in Palestine and Jordan. The organization provides training and resources to local youth to start their own sustainable businesses, such as solar panel installation or organic farming.

Role of the United Nations in Arab Countries Investing in Global Citizenship

The United Nations (UN) plays an important role in developing global citizenship in Arab countries, by promoting the values and skills which are essential, such as intercultural dialogue, human rights, sustainability and civic engagement (Edwards et al., 2020).One key way in which the UN promotes global citizenship in the Arab countries is GCED programmes, which aim to prepare students with the knowledge, skills and attitudes required to become responsible global citizens (Al’Abri et al., 2022; Aydin & Cinkaya, 2018; Ghosn-Chelala, 2020). The UN works with national governments, civil society organizations and educational institutions in Arab countries to integrate GCED into school curricula, teacher training programmes and community-based initiatives (Sever & Tok, 2023).

Moreover, the UN supports a range of initiatives in Arab countries that promote global citizenship values and skills. For example, they support the establishment of youth-led initiatives such as the Arab Youth Climate Movement and Arab Youth Volunteering for a Better Future, which provide opportunities for young people to engage in civic activities and contribute to the sustainable development of their communities. Intercultural exchange programmes in Arab countries aim to promote mutual understanding and respect among cultures and communities, and include exchange programmes for students and faculty, cultural festivals and public events that celebrate diversity and cultural heritage. Most importantly, they promote the integration of GCED into school curricula, faculty, teacher training programmes and community-based initiatives in Arab countries. GCED aims to equip learners with the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to become responsible global citizens and engage in issues of global concern, such as poverty, climate change and social inequality (UNESCO Office Beirut and Regional Bureau for Education in the Arab States Director (2022)).

Global citizenship education

Citizenship education, according to Massey (2013), is not just about teaching students to love their country, people and culture, it also includes educating them about urgent moral issues in the world and inspiring them to see the humanity in others and interact with other cultures with respect. Despite the fact that education systems offer services to increase students’ knowledge of their national citizenship, Davies et al. (2005) state that globalization has fundamentally impacted citizenship education.

Global education is a large topic, and as its goals can change along with its definition and breadth (Reddy, 2019). A few historical cultures, such as the Chinese, Romans and Mesopotamians, looked for solutions and assistance from outside their conventional ways of thinking and embraced other practises. It should be mentioned, nonetheless, that these cultures did not disregard their customs while seeking advancement of their goals and considered their culture’s aspects to be positive (Reddy, 2019). Diverse cultures appreciate global education and develop tools to incorporate other people’s viewpoints about participation and interdependence into their existing conceptions (Reddy, 2019). As a result, many institutions’ mission statements and philosophies incorporate global education.

GCED has been around for more than 50 years, and so it is not a new idea (Çolak et al., 2019; Pike, 2008). Both GCED and citizenship education are important parts of the process. Although researchers have approached and built on GCED in different ways, their primary objective is essentially the same. For instance, Shultz (2007) claims that three ideological agendas frequently coincide with GCED initiatives. Firstly, the radical method helps people understand how Western cultures encourage people to take action against international organizations (Grimwood, 2018). Secondly, in order to embrace variety in equitable, democratic communities, transformationalism cultivates an understanding of global connection with faraway people and issues (Shultz, 2007). Lastly, the neoliberal approach encourages international markets to accept the concept that people should be able to travel freely without being constrained by national borders (Shultz, 2007).

In colleges and schools in the US and UK, GCED is advancing quickly (Schattle, 2008). In recent years, New Zealand, Australia, the UK, Canada and the US have made global citizenship a key component of social studies curricula (Aydin & Cinkaya, 2018). As the world grows more globalized, many other developed Western nations are educating their children and young people about global events (Çolak et al., 2019; Jorgenson & Shultz, 2012). The GCED framework addresses the following areas: technology proficiency, engagement in intercultural dialogue, environmental awareness, and knowledge of world history and literature (Schattle, 2008).

UN and the Sustainable Development Goals

The UN has incorporated citizenship into its SDGs as a result of scholarly attention. In order to address and resolve global challenges and become proactive contributors to a more peaceful, just, tolerant, secure, inclusive and sustainable world, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), introduced a major mandate for citizenship education (UNESCO, 2014), which divides GCED into three dimensions:

  1. (1)

    Cognitive: Learn about, comprehend, and critically consider local, regional, national and global concerns and the interdependence and connectivity of various states and residents.

  2. (2)

    Socio-emotional: Develop a sense of connection to humanity, which is demonstrated by sharing duties, moral principles, acts of solidarity, empathy and respect for the individuality and uniqueness of others.

  3. (3)

    Behavioural: Take responsible and effective action for sustainability and peace on a local and global scale (UNESCO, 2014).

Additionally, UNESCO recommends the following educational tenets:

  • Local and global viewpoints should be considered in all levels and modes of education.

  • Education should foster a greater appreciation of and respect for the beliefs and practises of other peoples, groups and civilizations.

  • Education ought to raise people’s knowledge of how interdependent nations and countries are.

  • Education should improve student communication skills.

  • It is important to teach students about their personal obligations as well as their roles and responsibilities in society and at the national level.

  • Students should be encouraged to think internationally about problems rather than just locally.

GCED in the Qatari Context

Qatar is situated in the Middle East, with the Persian Gulf to the North, East and West, and Saudi Arabia to the South. Its capital is Doha. As of May 2023, the population of Qatar is 2,532,104 million, with 11.6% Qatari (2015 est.) and 88.4% non-Qatari (World Factbook, n.d.).

GCED is an emerging field in Qatar, which is gaining increasing attention from policymakers, educators and civil society organizations (Sever & Tok, 2023; Wafa, 2022; Zguir et al., 2021). Qatar is committed to promoting GCED for building a sustainable economy based on knowledge (Wafa, 2022; Zguir et al., 2021). In Qatar, GCED is seen as a way to help young people become engaged, responsible global citizens who can contribute to their communities’ and the world’s sustainable development (Sever & Tok, 2023). The Qatari government has created a variety of policies and initiatives, such as the Qatar National Vision 2030, the National Development Strategy 2018–2022, and the Qatar National Curriculum Standards, to encourage the integration of GCED into the educational system (Government Communications Office, 2022). This vision lays out a thorough framework for the growth of a sustainable and diverse economy and society that strongly emphasizes human development and education (Government Communications Office, 2022). The vision emphasizes the value of GCED in educating young people to become engaged, global citizens (Government Communications Office, 2022). The National Development Strategy 2018–2022, which aims to provide students with the information, skills and attitudes necessary to become responsible global citizens, highlights GCED as a key area for development. The policy emphasizes how critical it is to develop a culture of global responsibility among all sections of society, and include GCED in school curricula, teacher training programmes and community-based projects (Ministry of Development Planning and Statistics, 2019). The Qatar National Curriculum Standards, which were introduced in 2017, provide a comprehensive and coherent framework for teaching and learning in Qatar (General framework for national education (2011)). The standards include a focus on GCED, which is integrated into the curriculum across all subjects and grade levels (General Framework for National Education (2011)). The standards aim to produce students who are globally aware, and committed to the sustainable development of their communities and the world at large (General Framework for National Education (2011)).

Sever and Tok (2023) focus on creating resources to improve youths’ comprehension of Qatari values, culture and legacy, as well as global citizenship. Their main goal is to incorporate the idea of global citizenship into education to help students develop the critical, creative and innovative thinking, communication skills, empathy and information literacy abilities outlined in UNESCO’s Education 2030.

Methodology

The three components of the global citizenship framework outlined by Morais and Ogden (2011), social responsibility, global competence and global civic engagement, are used in this paper to investigate the global citizenship abilities of Qatar University students. Morais and Ogden’s three components are modified to create the idea of global citizenship for the investigation. This study also asks what part Qatar University plays in helping its students acquire global citizenship abilities. To ascertain correlations among the various scales of the three variables, the Likert scale method is used, in Google Forms, in accordance with the quantitative research strategy.

Procedure

Morais and Ogden’s Global Citizenship Scale (GCS) is modified as the study tool for gathering information. 43 items are split into three modified variables: social responsibility (SR) 13 (SR1, SR2, SR3, … SR13), global competence (GC) 13 (GC14, GC15, GC16, … GC26), and global civic engagement (GCE) 17 (GCE27, GCE28, GCE29, … GCE43).

A modified version of GCS reliability analysis indicates a Cronbach’s alpha for SR (0.609), GC (0.792), GCE (0.914), and an overall GCS (0.900), with N = 43 items, indicating strong internal consistency among the items and suggesting that this measure is a reliable indicator of the construct. Additionally, we assess the validity of the instrument using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (Table 1), and the results show a significant positive correlation. The relationship between the three variables and GCS is examined using correlational analysis. The results show a good positive relationship between SR and scores for GC (r (315) = 0.396, p < 0.01), CE (r (315) = 0.415, p < 0.01), and GCS (r (315) = 0.680, p < 0.01). Also, there is a positive correlation between GC and GCE (r (315) = 0.459, p < 0.01) and between GCS and GC (r (315) = 0.743, p < 0.01). Additionally, there is a strong correlation between GCE and GC (r (315) = 0.459, p < 0.01). Lastly, there are strong positive correlations between GCS and SR (r (315) = 0.680, p < 0.01), GC (r (315) = 0.743, p < 0.01) and GCE (r (315) = 0.891, p < 0.01).

Table 1 Pearson correlation coefficient showing relationships between the global citizenship scales.
Full size table

Because all the GCS items are declarative statements, there are various levels of agreement with the global citizenship concepts. Therefore, a 5-point Likert-type scale with the values strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5) is employed to evaluate each response. It is important to note that some products are changed to be usable by Qatar University students. The department of student affairs received the Google Forms from the researcher at the end of March 2022. The researcher received data by May 2022. Expert judgments and a pilot study extracting 30 cases from the collected data were used to validate the instrument.

Respondents

Qatar University students (N = 323) from 10 colleges participated in a survey administered through Google Forms. The colleges were:

  1. i.

    College of Engineering

  2. ii.

    College of Medicine

  3. iii.

    College of Dental Medicine

  4. iv.

    College of Pharmacy

  5. v.

    College of Arts & Sciences

  6. vi.

    College of Education

  7. vii.

    College of Sharia Islamic Study

  8. viii.

    College of Law

  9. ix.

    College of Business and Economics

  10. x.

    College of Health Sciences

A sample of 317 respondents was used, with a 98.7% response rate. One hundred and ninety-one (29%) of the students were in their second year of study, nine hundred and eight (31.2%) were in their third year, fifty-seven (18.2%) were in their fourth year, and twenty-three (7.3%) were in their final year. Three students (0.9%) omitted to state their academic year. Likewise, two hundred and thirty-five (74.6%) of the students were citizens of Qatar, and eighty (25.4%) were international students. Among the Qataris, one hundred and sixty-one (50.8%) were Bedouin and one hundred and fifty-three (48.3%) were non-Bedouin. Two hundred and fifty-four (80%) were female and sixty-one (19.2%) were male. Among the females, fifty-five (21.8%) were international (non-Qatari) and one hundred and ninety-seven (78.2%) were Qatari students. Of the male students, thirty-seven (60.7%) were Qatari and twenty-four (39.3%) were international non-Qatari. Two hundred and forty-four (77.5%) were full-time students, of which sixty-eight (27.3%) were international (non-Qatari) and one hundred and seventy-six (72.1%) were Qatari. Seventy-one (22.5%) of the students were not enroled full-time, of which fifty-nine (83.1%) were Qatari and twelve (16.9%) were not. One hundred and ninety-seven (62.5%) of the students were between the ages of 18 and 25, followed by fifty-three (16.8%) between the ages of 26 and 30, thirty-six (11.4%) between the ages of 31 and 35, and twenty-nine (9.2%) between the ages of 36 and 40.

Results

RQ1. What is the level of global citizenship skills in Qatar University students?

The descriptive statistics function in SPSS is used to present the mean scores and standard deviations for each of the three components of global citizenship skills (SR, GC, GCE) and the overall score in Table 2. The sample size for each component ranges from 316 to 317. On the scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 representing ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 representing ‘strongly agree’) the mean score for SR is 3.22 (SD = 0.44), for GC is 3.66 (SD = 0.53), and for GCE is 3.30 (SD = 0.71). Overall, the mean score for GCS is 3.40 (SD = 0.44). The minimum and maximum scores for each component are also given.

Table 2 Students’ global citizenship skills and its components mean scores.
Full size table

The mean scores suggest that, on average, students score above the midpoint of the scale (3.0) for all three components, indicating that they tend to ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ with the items that measure the constructs. It is worth noting that the standard deviations provide an indication of the variability in the scores within each component, with a larger standard deviation indicating a wider range of scores. Overall, the results in Table 2 indicate that the sample of students at Qatar University have relatively positive perceptions of their global citizenship attributes.

RQ2. Based on the relationship between the demographic factors (gender, age, nationality, family origin, college, occupation, income) and the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE), what are the differences in GCS among Qatar University students?

Gender

A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) is used to assess the effects of gender (male vs. female) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The results show a significant multivariate effect for gender on the dependent variables (Lambda(3, 310) = 0.940, p < 0.001). The degrees of freedom are 3 and 310, indicating there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 315 participants.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicates a significant effect of gender on the dependent variable SR (F(1, 313) = 5.315, p = 0.022, ETA^2 = 0.032), suggesting a small effect. However, no significant effect is found for gender on the dependent variables GC (F(1, 312) = 0.009, p = 0.922, ETA^2 = 0.000) or GCE (F(1, 313) = 13.606, p < 0.001, ETA^2 = 0.078).

The mean scores for SR are higher for females (M = 3.2495, SD = 0.44017) than males (M = 3.1059, SD = 0.42253), while the mean scores for GC are similar for females (M = 3.6623, SD = 0.53104) and males (M = 3.6697, SD = 0.52999). The mean scores for GCE are higher for females (M = 3.3561, SD = 0.68507) than males (M = 2.9879, SD = 0.75995). It should be noted that the between-component variance for GC is replaced by 0.0 due to a negative value.

Age

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of age (18–25, 26–30, 31–35, 36–40) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). No significant multivariate effect is found for age on the dependent variables (Lambda(3, 309) = 0.958, p > 0.05). The degrees of freedom are 9 and 754, indicating there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 315 participants.

ANOVA is conducted to determine the effect of age (18–25, 26–30, 31–35, 36–40) on the dependent variables SR, GC and GCE. The results show a significant effect of age on SR (F(3, 313) = 3.283, p = 0.021, η² = 0.030), but not on GC (F(3, 312) = 0.146, p = 0.932, η² = 0.001) or GCE (F(3, 313) = 0.697, p = 0.554, η² = 0.007).

Post-hoc tests using the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) method reveal a significant difference between the 36–40 age group and the 26–30 age group in SR (p = 0.015), but no other significant differences are found between the age groups.

Nationality

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of nationality (Qatari vs. non- Qatari) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). No significant multivariate effect is found for nationality on the dependent variables (Lambda(3, 310) = 0.990, p > 0.05). The degrees of freedom are 3 and 310, indicating there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 315 participants in the study.

ANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of nationality (Qatari vs. non-Qatari) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The ANOVA results show that the effect of nationality (Qatari vs. non-Qatari) is not significant for SR (F(1,313) = 0.436, p = 0.509, ETA^2 = 0.001), marginally significant for GC (F(1,312) = 0.920, p = 0.338, ETA^2 = 0.003), and not significant for GCE (F(1313) = 2.269, p = 0.133, ETA^2 = 0.007).

Family Origin

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of family origin (Bedouin vs. non- Bedouin) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). No significant multivariate effect is found for family origin on the dependent variables (Lambda(3, 309) = 0.991, p > 0.05). The degrees of freedom are 3 and 309, indicating that there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 313 participants.

ANOVA is conducted to examine the effect of family origin (Bedouin vs. Non-Bedouin) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The results indicate that there is no significant effect of family origin on SR (F(1, 312) = 0.015, p = 0.901, ETA^2 = 0.000), a non-significant effect on GCE (F(1, 312) = 2.125, p = 0.146, ETA^2 = 0.007), and a marginally significant effect on GC (F(1, 311) = 0.479, p = 0.489, ETA^2 = 0.002).

The descriptive statistics show that the mean scores for SR, GC and GCE vary across the two levels of family origin. However, the between-groups component variance for each of the three dependent variables is very small ( < 1), indicating that there is little variation between the two levels of family origin in each variable. It should be noted that, for the random effects, the between-component variance is negative, and replaced by 0.0 when computing the random effects measure.

College

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of college on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The results show a significant multivariate effect for college on the dependent variables (Lambda(24, 876.5) = 0.880, p =0.026). The degrees of freedom are 24 and 876.5, indicating there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 313 participants. Post-hoc tests indicate that there are significant differences between certain levels of the college variable on the dependent variables.

ANOVA is conducted to examine the effect of college on SR, GC and GCE. The results of the ANOVA indicate a significant effect of college on SR (F (8, 305) = 1.26, p = 0.266, η2 = 0.032), GC (F (8, 304) = 0.825, p = 0.581, η2 = 0.021), and GCE (F (8, 305) = 2.58, p = 0.01, η2 = 0.064). These values indicate that the effect of college on GCE is larger than the effects on SR and GC, but all effects are relatively small.

Occupation

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of occupation (student vs. student/employed) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). No significant multivariate effect is found for occupation on the dependent variables (Lambda(3, 312) = 0.984, p > 0.05). The degrees of freedom are 1 and 315, indicating there are two levels of occupation (student vs. student/employed) and a total of 316 participants.

ANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of occupation (student vs. student/employed) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The descriptive statistics show that the mean scores of SR, GC and GCE vary across the two levels of occupation. However, the ANOVA results show that the effect of occupation on the dependent variables is not significant for SR (F(1, 315) = 1.004, p = 0.317, ETA^2 = 0.001), marginally significant for GC (F(1, 314) = 5.062, p = 0.025, ETA^2 = 0.016), and not significant for GCE (F(1, 315) = 1.572, p = 0.211, ETA^2 = 0.005). The between-groups component variance for SR, GC and GCE are reported in the descriptive statistics table.

Income

MANOVA is conducted to assess the effects of monthly income ( < QR 10000, QR 10000 – QR 19000, QR 20000 – QR 29000, QR 30000 – QR 39000, QR 40000 – QR 49000, QR 50000 – QR 59000, > 50000) on the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). No significant multivariate effect is found for monthly income on the dependent variables (Lambda(18, 849) = 0.907, p > 0.001). The degrees of freedom are 18 and 849, indicating there are 3 dependent variables and a total of 309 participants.

ANOVA is conducted to examine the relationship between monthly income and the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE). The results reveal a significant main effect of monthly income on SR (F(6,303) = 5.12, p < 0.001, η² = 0.09), GC (F(6,302) = 7.62, p < 0.001, η² = 0.13), and GCE (F(6,303) = 3.15, p = 0.005, η² = 0.06).

The mean monthly income for the population (in Qatari Riyal) for SR (n = 250) is M = 10,292 (SD = 6,443), GC (n = 253) is M = 24,969 (SD = 13,068) and GCE (n = 354) is M = 31,112 (SD = 15,909). The post-hoc analyses show that there are no significant differences in mean monthly income between any of the income brackets at the alpha level of 0.05.

While the mean monthly income varies between the three populations, there are no significant differences in mean monthly income between income brackets within the SR, GC or GCE populations.

RQ3. How are social responsibility, global competence and global civic engagement related to global citizenship, the independent variable?

As mentioned, the relationship between the three variables and global citizenship is examined using correlational analysis. The results show a good positive relationship between social responsibility and the scores for global competence (r (315) = 0.396, p < 0.01), civic engagement (r (315) = 0.415, p < 0.01), and global citizenship (r (315) = 0.680, p < 0.01).

Also, there is a good positive relationship between global competence and civic engagement (r (315) = 0.459, p < 0.01) and between global citizenship and global competence (r (315) = 0.743, p < 0.01).

Additionally, there is a strong correlation between civic engagement and global competence (r (315) = 0.459, p < 0.01). Lastly, there is a strong positive link between global citizenship and social responsibility (r (315) = 0.680, p < 0.01), global competence (r (315) = 0.743, p < 0.01), and civic engagement (r (315) = 0.891, p < 0.01).

Discussion

Based on the results of RQ1, which concerns the level of GCS among the Qatar University student body, the students at Qatar University have a positive perception of their global citizenship skills. However, the results provided in Tables 1 and 2 have some potential implications for faculty, teachers, educators and policymakers in the field of education. The results in Table 1 show a strong correlation between GCS and its components (SR, GC and GCE), which reflects the interdependence of the components and the need to foster comprehensive approaches beyond academic courses. Similarly, the results in Table 2 suggest that GCED can be assessed through multiple dimensions, such as SR, GC and GCE, and this information can help faculty, teachers, educators and policymakers develop assessment tools to measure the effectiveness of their GCED programmes. The results in Table 1 also provide information about the strengths and weaknesses of students’ GCE. This information can help faculty, teachers and educators develop more comprehensive and balanced curricula that address the areas where students are weaker and reinforce the areas where they are strong. It can also reveal the faculty’s professional development needs in GCED. As there are areas where students show lower scores, such as SR (M = 3.22; SD = 0.44), educators can receive training in these specific areas to improve their teaching practices. Furthermore, the results provide insights for policymakers about the effectiveness of current policies and initiatives in promoting GCED. Policymakers can use this information to develop new policies and programmes that address the gaps in students’ GCS. Finally, the results in Table 2 can be used to make international comparisons of GCED. By using standardized assessment tools, educators and policymakers can compare the performance of students in different countries and identify best practices in GCED.

RQ 2 examines the relationships and differences between the demographic variables (gender, age, nationality, family origin, college, occupation, income) and the three dependent variables (SR, GC, GCE) using MANOVA and ANOVA in SPSS. The results indicate that, by gender, females show significant differences in SR, GC, GCE and GCS from males. The reason for these significant differences is because the overall enrolment of female students is more than male students, for multiple reasons. Firstly, Qatar University is the only public university in Qatar where conservative parents comfortably send their daughters to pursue further education. Secondly, females have limited options for higher education and therefore there are more female students (78%) overall than male students (22%) (Institutional Research and Analytic Department Strategy and Development Office, 2020). Finally, male students have many options to pursue higher education, such as joining the army college, studying overseas or choosing other higher education. The findings show there is no statistically significant difference between Qatari and non-Qatari students in terms of global citizenship and its constituent parts. The only variable for which occupation is relevant is GC, despite the fact that the data show no significant difference between students who are employed and those who are not. Additionally, there is no discernible difference detected based on family origin (Bedouin or non-Bedouin). No significant multivariate effect is found for age on the dependent variables. However, there is a significant effect of age on SR, with students aged 36 to 40 having lower mean scores than those aged 18 to 25.

As there is a significant effect of college on the three dependent variables, it is evident that the type of college attended by students has a substantial impact on their academic performance. Moreover, there are significant differences for some components of GCS and Qatar University colleges. Therefore, policymakers and educators can play an important role in providing adequate resources and support for students based on the type of college they attend. For instance, students attending colleges with lower performance levels may require more support and resources to ensure they achieve success. On the other hand, students attending colleges with higher performance levels may require less support but benefit from more challenging academic programmes. This implies that the university’s academic programmes and curricula may have an impact on the development of global citizenship skills, and certain colleges may be more effective in cultivating these skills in their students.

The RQ3 results show a positive and significant relationship between SR, GC, GCE and overall GCS. Therefore, enhancing GC may augment GCE and broaden the horizon of SR globally. Incorporating activities which develop GC would boost students’ abilities to cope with rapidly changing international trends, and may lead to a more socially responsible and globally aware society.

Conclusion

This study identifies the status of Qatar University students in GCS using three indicators, SR, GC and GCE. Even though there is a great deal of research into GCED internationally, this study is the first to focus on Qatar University. There is a tremendous need for research on this subject in Arab countries, because there are still gaps in the empirical study of GCED. This kind of research serves as a base for enhancing the values of global citizenship, not just among university students but also in the preK–12 age range. The findings of this study contribute to the development of a new generation with high SR, GC, and GCE abilities that promote greater global citizenship skills.

The results of this study show how Qatari students are doing on the GCS scales. The overall findings for the three measures show that the students’ GCE proficiency is high. The findings show that students give SR a lower rating than the other factors. In a similar vein, compared to the other two, their self-evaluation of how well they perform global skills positions them in the middle. Of the three categories, civic participation can be said to be the most prevalent. Additionally, it should be highlighted that the findings are at the higher end, consistent with Qatar’s diversified community and the current system of modern education. Due to the strong correlations between the three skills—SR, GC, and GCE—Qatar University students are often seen as more globally aware and involved citizens. The consistent findings support Myers’ (2016) claim that higher education students’ understanding of global citizenship is enhanced by GCED. One of the reasons that Qatar University has higher levels of GCS is that it provides various courses that contain various topics which enhance GCS; courses such as Globalization, Sustainable Development, Political Sociology, Political, Social, and Religious Movements and Human Rights, which are provided by the College of Arts and Sciences.

This study suggests that Qatar’s faculty, teachers, policymakers, and educators evaluate and work on areas for development in academic and non-academic settings. This can be enhanced by internationalizing the curriculum and providing enough opportunities for a diverse student body. Therefore, Qatar University should continue to improve global citizenship abilities by adding activities and materials that encourage global citizenship, notwithstanding the study’s findings.

Despite the results of this study, Qatar University should continue to enhance global citizenship skills by incorporating activities and texts that support global citizenship. Additionally, there is a need for more research into global citizenship and its various aspects which matches the changing paradigm of education. For example, to enhance global citizenship for students and faculty, exchange programmes with international universities, workshops, conferences, seminars, and scientific events would be beneficial to address topics arising and help develop global citizenship skills.