Today, when discussing educational and schooling issues, it is not uncommon to include references to the world of corporate business. This occurs in spite of vast differences and because of common factors that exist between the two. The corporate and schooling worlds, in their more specific elements, are vastly different. These differences exist both in their intent and in their content. For example, schools are not usually regarded as small or large businesses. They do not exist for 'profit' , that is, in the corporate sense of the word. Corporations deal with commodities, such as microchips, which are mass produced and over which corporations exercise absolute control. Schools on the other hand deal with persons, and more specifically, persons as learners. Learning is processed through developing human persons over which schools exercise only a modicum of control and which cannot be mass produced. Learning is not produced in the 'production' sense of the word. Indeed learning, which is the raison d'etre of schooling, is only cultivated and processed over long periods of time and only through interaction with human subject. Microchips on the other hand are produced very quickly and are completely devoid of interaction.

However, given the above differences in the two worlds of business and schooling they do share one common bond, namely, a common socio/cultural/ economic place in society. That is to say, they are both heavily influenced, and to a large extent controlled by, the socio/cultural/economic milieu in which they exist. One of the specific forces operating within the socio-economic-cultural milieu today and impacting very heavily on education and corporations is the rapid development and growth of Globalization.

The term globalization, now a household word, has been described by corporate researchers such as Ohmae (1989), and educational writers such as Hargreaves (1994), as instant access to information about ideas, goods and services from all over the globe. This access to information is not limited to the network of electronic communications such as computer, internet or the visual/audio/print messages of television, but to actual physical interconnectedness as well. One only has to travel to places like Canada, China, Israel, Japan, Australia, Russia, Thailand, Hong Kong, the United States, Indonesia, etc., and observe the masses of people from various countries visiting and interacting with one another. We know for example that some ten million Japanese travel outside their country every year. Easy access to previously inaccessible continents brought on by swift and affordable jet travel, coupled with knowledge attained through television etc. has made such intercontinental visitation a reality for people who some twenty years ago thought it impossible. Some years ago the growing intercommunication network around the earth led people to refer to the earth as The Shrinking Globe. Today, thanks to the accelerated growth in the communication field and the fast pace in the development of telecommunications and transportation, we no longer refer to the earth as the "shrinking globe". People today are citizens of the world and are actually living in, and experiencing, the 'shrunken' globe. We have been 'globalized' not necessarily by choice but by circumstance.

This easy access to travel, and instant availability of information in particular, has had an immense impact on our youth of today. Youth, who are both the present and future consumers of the educational and corporate worlds, have become people of the globe and citizens of the world. They are the participants and consumers in the globalized world. They are members of the new wave socio-economic milieu which Ohmae (1989) refers to as the ILE or the interlinked economy. The ILE, which, in the main, consists of the USA, Canada, the European Community, and Japan and which will soon incorporate the growing economies of such places as Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, is a powerful entity both from a socio-cultural and socio-economic point of view. The ILE has been created, and continues to grow, based on the need for more liberal trading alliances. Freer trading relations necessarily implies and requires a more closely knit and interconnected socio-cultural relationship. To survive politically and be economically viable, the ILE will need more than just freer trade in the so called economic commodities. It will also need greater socio/cultural/educational and political understanding and interaction (interconnectedness) Ohmae (1989).

To live and indeed to function economically and culturally in this interlinked economy requires a major change, both cognitively and emotionally, in the way people view other cultures. They must learn how to work with other peoples who hold varied and sometimes contradictory values that foster different cultures from their own. This necessitates living with differences, letting go of some held values and adopting and/or adapting to those held by others. This implies not only changing the way they think but more importantly, changing the way they do things. In reality, this means adapting to the changes and developments of the new age world or what has been termed the postmodern society. It is within the context of this postmodern world (era ) that globalization and such economic arrangements as the ILE has developed and are seen to flourish.

Postmodernism, which I believe to be inextricably tied to the globalization phenomena, has been defined as an emerging set of social, cultural and economic and educational (my own addition) conditions that have come to characterize the age of global capitalism and industrialism (Aronowitz and Giroux, 1991; Jenks, 1989). Within the context of this Ism, education, not unlike economics, is going through a period of transition and hence change. While change is generally positive it can also sometimes be negative. One of the more negative aspects of this rapid change is the danger of retreat to the past by the weak hearted. An example of this in education can be seen in the strong movement in Britain, Australia and in Canada towards centralisation of education both in policy and curriculum. This is a paradoxical situation. On the one hand the postmodern philosophy with its proposals for globalization and devolution of power and authority calls for decentralisation, whereas these school systems, which had their development during the modernist era, are retreating to centralisation. In many instances this centralisation of power is enshrouded within the postmodern term, empowerment. Governments, and bureaucrats specifically, centralise the power of educational administration in bureaucratic institutions while at the same time they promote power to parents, for example, in the guise of school councils. However, these councils can be, for the most part, under the direct control of the principal who is under direct control of the bureaucrats. This paradoxical situation weakens the educational system's attempts at globalization and to a large extent renders change neutral. The 'retreating reaction' to change is one of the many fear responses to the reality of globalization and negatively impacts on the development of education.

Another reaction to globalization has been the development of an identity crises within many nations. With the fact of globalization comes the necessity to become equal/sharing partners with peoples of other nations who may have different/cultural /religious/educational values. This mixing and crossover of cultures somehow raises fear in people that they will all become like robotic newts and lose their own specific 'national' characteristics. In other words, it raises the ugly head of Nationalism (for example, the long fight in Northern Ireland over the issue of British/or Irish identity or the often impassioned debate in Canada over French/English identity). This fear of loss of national identity can also be seen in the Islam movement, or among the West Bank Palestinians, who fear losing their identity and being absorbed by the Jewish community and similarly with the Jewish community and so on. Geographically speaking, we can see that the lines on the map which separate territories are as clear as ever (Ohmae, 1989). However, when it comes to interaction and intercommunication, both from an economic and socio-educational point of view, these boundaries, in most instances, have all but disappeared and in many others they are weakening.

A contributing factor in the demise of (philosophically speaking) geographic boundaries has been the rapid development of technology and the instant availability of information. These developments, however, may not in themselves be the cause of the weakening of the boundaries. It may be simply the inability of governments and bureaucrats to harness and prevent the free flowing characteristic of this information from infiltrating their countries. There is no way to absolutely control this flow. The young person in a remote village in Africa, by the flip of a switch, can become aware of the lifestyle of the person in New York or Toronto. This information is available and packaged electronically and ready for consumption. Globalization of information is limited only by our unwillingness to mobilise it. In our more nostalgic moments we can be somewhat tolerant of this felt need by governments to retreat and to retain their national identity amidst the pressure brought on by globalization. However, there are ways that nations can preserve their own identity while at the same time embracing the identities of other cultures. It is within the context of these national reactions to postmodern globalization, both by the corporate and schooling worlds, that I believe the crux of living productively or not within the reality of globalization lies. It is here that the process of education becomes, and continues to develop into, an all important force.

There are a number of implications for education within the context of postmodern globalization. The practice of teacher education must be addressed. We have to look at our teacher education institutions, and more specifically, the curriculum they offer. The question we must ask ourselves is, are we offering to potential teachers opportunities for awareness and reflection and personal theoretical development that will help them come to grips with their own cultural belief systems? It is only when we have a deep objective understanding and appreciation of our own culture that we can begin to accept and tolerate the culture of others. This implies a deep understanding of not only the good points in our particular culture but also the negative points as well. A shift away from giving teacher education students a curriculum which is insular, localised and nationalistic is required. A broader curriculum which will take into account more than their own cultural world is needed. Curriculum for teacher education programs in the pre-globalization era was built on the concept of the meta-narrative and positivistic philosophy. It was developed with a belief in scientific certitude and an adherence to traditional based knowledge. Unquestioning belief in both these institutions has been eroded today. Moral, religious and personal theories or belief systems are no longer accepted as absolute and constant truths. Today these values are seen as multifaceted, individualistic and flexible. Teacher education in the globalized context has to be based on inquiry and problem solving which is not confined to absolutes within their intra-cultural milieu but which also concerns itself with inter-cultural diversity and likenesses.

Another concern that must be addressed in order for education to become a useful tool in the globalized world is school based curriculum. Similar to the need for broadening the teacher education curriculum, the need also exists for a broader more comprehensive school based curriculum. Education in the globalized society is not only learning about math and science. It is not only learning about another language and culture. It is not only reading about cultural/ethnic differences. Education in the postmodern globalized society is also about living with and experiencing other ethnic groups and cultures. It ought to challenge the ethnocentricity inherent in the modernist curriculum (Hargreaves, 1994). Like the globalized economy, education should flow freely across all boundaries. The curriculum should indeed retain and foster what is beneficial to its own culture but it also should open up and freely discuss, in an unbiased way, the values/beliefs/ norms/rituals etc, which are part of other cultures. It is imperative that young people in the postmodern globalized world reflect on and cultivate their own specific cultures. However, this ought to be seen as only half the learning process. The other half has to do with understanding and actively involving oneself in the culture/customs and life style of other nations. This has to become the norm for preparing young people for life in the reality of postmodern globalization. To survive, that is, to become in Maslows' terms, self actualised, the student of today must be capable of living in a manner that is flexible and adaptive.

Globalization within the postmodern context has been the cause of instability and uncertainty in a world that up to the late 1980's was thought to be stable and certain. It is difficult to let go of old practices. In fact, what has happened in education in many countries is, instead of looking ahead to the challenges of the new globalized world, they have reverted to the old modernist world. This is an example of not being able to change lenses and see the world as it really is and not as we would like it to be. For example, the return to a fixed and certain scientific curriculum may be a safe move for bureaucrats but not necessarily the best move for the students who have to learn and cope with an unsure and uncertain scientific world. Students, like their teachers, need to be trained in the art of experimentation and inquiry. They have to be encouraged to search for new and different discoveries and not be saddled with a rehash of what the modernist discovered and what they (modernists) have deemed to be immutable and certain. To accommodate this sense of searching for knowledge the curriculum in the schools of today must also be based on creativity and inquiry. Students should be made aware that in the globalized world, geographic boundaries for the most part exist only on paper. Jobs in the future are not necessarily going to be available in the factory just down the road. Indeed, the work environment itself in the globalized world is not only different in location but is also different in substance (for example there are few jobs in the manufacturing industry today and in the future). Students must be taught to see the world through different lenses. The lenses of the past gave a picture of a world consisting of small nations operating pretty well independently of each other and whose populations were relatively uninformed and uneducated. The lenses of today portray the opposite. Nations of today are interdependent and people are more informed and educated. Consequently, they have different expectations and make more demands on their society. The more informed students are about different nations, economies and cultures, the more adaptable they will become in living and working in these diverse and interdependent environments . Canada and Australia have made progress since the 1960s in preparing their youth for a global society through programs of multilingual and bilingual education. However, these programs have been constrained by such factors as the context of state (provincial) and federal involvement in these programs. There has been and is tension between multicultural education and the needs of the state in areas such as equality and economic efficiency and between the provinces in the relationship between bilingualism and national identity and resource allocation.

Students in today's world need to be made aware of the need to protect not only their own environmental space but also that of the total planet. They have to become aware that the protection of the rain forests in Brazil or Australia is as important to them as it is for the people of Australia or Brazil. It is criminal for bureaucrats to try to revert to the modernist world of education and try to hold on to their past while denying young people the opportunity to get to know, understand and experience the postmodern globalized world in which they will have to live and work.

The impact of globalization on curriculum also affects the role of the teacher in classrooms of today. Much time is spent in schools planning and developing specific subjects such as literature, language, mathematics, physics, etc. These are all useful and necessary ventures. However, in a technologically advanced world a lot of information about such topics is readily available through electronic methods. Hence, we ought to be spending more time with students helping them to become aware of this information and learning how they can access it through the use of the world wide network of telecommunications. There ought to be more time permitted in our curricula for enhancing students' knowledge about the various cultures of the world. Knowledge today is only as limited as our willingness to share it. This is not to imply that technology can replace the teacher. The presence of a qualified teacher in classrooms today is more necessary that ever. However, the role has changed. The teacher today, because of the proliferation of knowledge and of instant access to it, has to be a facilitator for accessing information and not necessarily be seen as the sole source and giver of knowledge. A narrow single minded source of knowledge aimed at giving all the knowledge that students need to know and protecting them from the so called 'contamination of foreign cultures' is not educationally sufficient in the globalized world. However, it continues to be tried. Schools that promote this method of educating will only act as short time barriers to the inevitable effects of globalization. If schools fail to acknowledge the need for more open educational practices, then youth will be the victims and they may not turn out to be the positive contributors to society that we intended them to be.

A third element that must become part of our education system in this globalized society is the necessity to provide opportunities for educators from different cultures to meet, interact and exchange ideas. In the past, public servants, such as ministerial employees, have been the recipients of this kind of interaction. It is a known fact that very little of what these bureaucrats observe and learn actually reaches the real world of learning. Hence their experiences are of little use to the practitioner in the field. It would be more educationally sound if this kind of exchange was more inclusive and more readily available to teachers who teach in schools and university professors who teach and do research at universities. This kind of exchange, although carried out at present, is done on a very limited scale. There is a danger in the present wave of rational economics to limit or indeed eliminate this very worthwhile and educationally needed practice. The rationale for continuing and indeed increasing this interactive process is obvious. As Dewey wrote in the mid thirties, experience is the best teacher. We can learn a great deal about others and their ideas from the modern print (email) and fax machines and from the audio/visual/print input of the television. We can extrapolate some notions of other cultures from these. However, being there and to actually become immersed in and experience the reality of the culture and its various nuances and sub texts, face to face, adds a dimension to our knowledge and understanding that is totally outside that which we get from the so called technical/print interaction. From a university point of view, I would suggest that a process be undertaken to establish on site extension campuses at various universities around the world. Memorial University of Newfoundland in Canada has such a campus. It is situated in the town of Harlow in Essex, England. This facility affords students and professors the opportunity to interact, in a very meaningful way, with professional educators and researchers from various professions within the European Community. We have only scratched the surface with this facility. It has the potential to become not only an international centre for learning but also has the potential to become and indeed, ought to become, multinational in its scope.

In conclusion, there is cause for optimism for the future in a globalized world. Never have we been so advanced, educationally, technologically and socially. However, despite these advances we have been hesitant to take on the challenge of change . When faced with this challenge, some leaders, in such critical areas as politics, economics and education, have tended to recoil to the comfort of nationalism and traditional fundamentalism. However, therein lies the crux of the problem. They must reflect and analyse their particular contribution or lack of it to this challenge of change. Having done this they must inculcate in youth the common sense to take the winds of change and use them for further advancement and not as signals to retreat to the past. We cannot allow education to become a so called advancement into the past. We must take and reflectively analyse the past, let go what is no longer relevant, preserve and adopt what is relevant, mould and incorporate that into the present, and then advance into the future with revitalised zeal.

Aronowitz, S. & Giroux, H.A. (1991). Postmodern education. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Beck, N. (1992). Shifting gears: Thriving in the new economy. Toronto: Harper Collins.

Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers work and culture in the postmodern age. Toronto: OISE Press.

Jencks, C. (1989). What is post-modernism? Great Britain: Academy Editions/ St. Martins Press.

Ohmae, K. (1989). The borderless world. New York: Free Press.