ABSTRACT
In recent years, educators, policy-makers and researchers have become increasingly interested in the significance of transnational mobility for the formation of a global outlook – often expressed with such notions as ‘global citizenship’ (e.g., Cabrera 2010), ‘global engagement’ (e.g., Paige et al. 2009), or the wider idea of ‘global mindedness’ (e.g., Kehl and Morris [2007] 2008; see also Andreotti 2010; Mannion et al. 2011). In both research and practice, there is
*Corresponding author. Email: vanessa.andreotti@ubc.ca
li ndre ttia,b, Gert Biestac nd Cash Ahenakewb
a strong focus on cognitive change, that is, on the idea that, if certain conditions are met, contact amongst different groups will enhance mutual understanding and, through this, reduce prejudice and improve relationships. This line of thought, which goes back to Gordon Allport’s contact hypothesis (see Allport 1954; see also Pettigrew and Tropp 2000), sees questions of transnational networking and interaction mainly in terms of understanding, that is, in terms of altering one’s conceptions and perceptions. It thus conceives of the issue to be addressed as a learning task, that is, the task to learn about others in order to gain a better understanding which, in turn, will lead to more just and more equitable relationships. Putting it in this way reveals both the humanist and universalist assumptions guiding research and practice – assumptions, moreover, that often tend to overlook the wider socio-political and historical dimensions that shape the conditions for (mis)understanding and (dis)connection.
