Urška Štremfel, PhD, Klaudija Šterman Ivančič, PhD
Comparison of Global Competencies in 
General and Vocational Education
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55707/ds-po.v39i1.121
Prejeto 9. 9. 2023 / Sprejeto 15. 1. 2024 Received 9. 9. 2023 / Accepted 15. 1. 2024
Znanstveni članek Scientific paper
UDK 373.5.011.2:316.722 UDC 373.5.011.2:316.722
KLJUČNE BESEDE: globalne kompetence, PISA KEYWORDS: global competencies, PISA 2018, Slo-
2018, Slovenija, gimnazijski programi, poklicni pro- venia, general and vocational upper-secondary edu-
grami cation programmes
POVZETEK – Članek se osredotoča na globalne kom- ABSTRACT – The article deals with global competen-
petence v znanstvenih in (javno)političnih razpravah, cies, understood in academic and policy discussions 
opredeljene kot skupek znanj, spretnosti, stališč in vre- as a set of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values cru-
dnot, ključnih za uspešno osebno in poklicno življenje cial for successful personal and professional life in a 
v globaliziranem svetu. Preučuje rezultate raziskave globalized world. It examines the PISA 2018 results, 
PISA 2018, ki kažejo, da so učenci v Sloveniji svoje which show that students in Slovenia self-assessed their 
globalne kompetence ocenili pod povprečjem OECD. global competencies below the OECD average. It ad-
Ukvarja se z znanstveno relevantnimi vprašanji ali, dresses the scientifically relevant questions of whether, 
kako in zakaj učenci in učenke v gimnazijskih in poklic- how and why students in Slovenia in general and vo-
nih srednješolskih programih v Sloveniji (ne) poročajo cational upper-secondary programmes (do not) report 
o enaki ravni globalnih kompetenc. Rezultati kažejo, da the same level of global competencies. The results show 
učenci in učenke poklicnih izobraževalnih programov v that students in vocational education programmes 
primerjavi z učenci in učenkami gimnazijskih progra- in comparison to students in general education pro-
mov poročajo o bistveno nižjih globalnih kompetencah, grammes report significantly lower global competen-
a o bistveno več priložnostih za učenje globalnih vsebin cies but significantly higher learning opportunities on 
v šoli. Rezultati, ki kažejo, da so v Sloveniji učenci in global issues at school. The results, which show that in 
učenke z nižjim socialno-ekonomskim statusom vklju- Slovenia students with lower socioeconomic status are 
čeni predvsem v programe poklicnega izobraževanja mainly involved in vocational education programmes 
in da možnosti za pridobivanje globalnih kompetenc v and that opportunities for acquiring global competen-
šoli niso bistveno povezane s samoocenjenimi global- cies in school are not significantly related to the self-
nimi kompetencami (zavedanjem globalnih vprašanj), reported global competencies (awareness of global is-
postavljajo pod vprašaj kompenzacijsko vlogo šole pri sues), question the compensating role of school in the 
pridobivanju globalnih kompetenc učencev in učenk. acquisition of global competencies by students. 
1 Introduction
The challenges of globalization require education systems to pay special attention 
to the education of global citizens who, with their global competencies, will be able to 
live in an increasingly interdependent, multicultural and rapidly changing world (e.g., 
OECD, 2020). While the theoretical foundations for global citizenship education date 
back to 1970 (e.g., Bourn, 2020), the measurement of global competencies has gained 
attention, especially in the last decades. The Programme for International Students As-
sessment (PISA, 2018) is the first study which assessed the global competencies of 
students around the world from an international comparative perspective. In its analyti-
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 69
cal framework, global competencies are understood as “the capacity to examine local, 
global and intercultural issues, to understand and appreciate the perspectives and world 
views of others, to engage in open, appropriate and effective interactions with people 
from different cultures, and to act for collective well-being and sustainable develop-
ment” (OECD, 2018, p. 7). In addition to international comparisons, its data provides 
in-depth insights into the acquisition of global competencies by 15-year-old students 
within the national education systems, including differences between different educa-
tional tracks. 
(Global) citizenship competencies in general and vocational education programmes 
Part of the mission of modern education systems is to foster formally equal citi-
zens by promoting the reproduction of essential conditions for democratic governance 
(Nylund et al., 2020; Sinjur, 2016). The main aim of education is to prepare students 
for successful participation in society and the labour market, and thus support their 
societal integration (Van Der Werfhost, 2017). Unequal access to opportunities to learn 
citizenship has been identified as an important factor that contributes to socioeconomic 
inequalities in later civic engagement (Hoskins et al., 2021) and thus affects the social 
cohesiveness of society (e.g., Van Goethem et al., 2020). Although the role of school in 
equipping students for later civic engagement has been well recognized, the research 
(e.g., Nylund et al., 2022) shows that not all students have the same learning opportu-
nities on these issues at school (Oblak and Lavrič, 2019). The data show that in most 
European Union member states, including Slovenia, the general upper-secondary edu-
cation programmes (GEP) and the vocational upper-secondary education programmes 
(VEP) differ significantly in terms of individual students’ factors (e.g., economic, so-
cial and cultural status – ESCS, prior educational experience, etc.), as well as systemic 
and school-level factors (goals, programmes, curricula, teacher training programmes), 
which may be related to future (global) civic and citizenship engagement. 
Using pooled European Social Survey data collected between 2002 and 2012 from 
24 European countries, Van der Werfhorst (2017) demonstrated that adults educated in 
VEP had lower levels of political engagement than adults educated in GEP (Van der 
Werfhorst, 2017). Similarly, Hoskins et al. (2014) found that 16 to 18-year-old students 
enrolled in VEP in Germany, England, and Denmark reported the intention to take part 
in elections less often than students in GEP. Dijkstra et al. (2021) note that students in 
GEP in comparison to their peers in VEP have greater civic knowledge (see also Van der 
Wal and Waslander, 2007); they are more supportive of equal rights for ethnic groups; 
they participate in more civic activities at school and rate them as important; they report 
a classroom climate that is open to discussion and more positive relationships between 
students and teachers. The students of GEP are more convinced that critical citizenship 
and personal development are important, while students of VEP are more focused on 
citizenship oriented towards adaptation and socially desirable behaviour. At the same 
time, Dijkstra et al. (2021) did not detect any differences between the education pro-
grammes regarding students’ confidence in their civic competencies and participation. 
Nylund et al. (2022) highlight that the curricula in GEP “provide substantially different 
opportunities to foster understanding and self-confidence to exert influence in work-
70 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
places or society”. GEP enable conceptual knowledge and training in critical thinking 
and active citizenship. These are lacking in VEP, although they seem to be very valuable 
in terms of acquiring “knowledge that enables the questioning of prevailing conditions”, 
“to address situations in vocational environments and exert influence at workplaces”, 
as well as to be engaged in civic issues (exerting influence through trade unions, etc.).
In this regard, the European Parliament (2022) recognized that VEP devotes lower 
attention to citizenship education in comparison to GEP. This is not only evident in 
the curricula and other learning opportunities on (global) citizenship issues at school, 
students’ civic knowledge and dispositions, but also in society and teachers’ views of 
citizenship education in different educational tracks (see Leenders et al., 2008; Van 
Goethem et al., 2020). 
Research gap and the aim of the research 
Van der Werfhorst (2017) highlights that although “civicness” can be regarded as 
one of the most important educational goals, the question of its realization in different 
education programmes has been neglected in the research. With few exceptions, such 
studies have not been directed towards VEP (Nylund et al., 2022).
Van De Werfhorst (2017) highlights that education systems (including general and 
vocational tracks) differ; therefore, it is important to consider a particular education 
system when addressing specific educational issues. The national strategic framework 
in Slovenia (see Šterman Ivančič and Štremfel, 2023) sets the acquisition of global 
competencies by students as an important educational goal. Research attention has al-
ready been devoted to the individual factors related to global competencies, e.g., gen-
der, migrant background, ESCS (Šterman Ivančič and Štremfel, 2022), while the school 
factors, such as the educational track, have not been studied yet. Slovenia provides an 
interesting context for such investigation since, with its post-socialist past and current 
education policy goals, it has been regarded as a strong proponent of equity in educa-
tion, also as regards the civics dimension of education. By focusing on the issue of the 
global competencies of students in Slovenia in GEP and VEP in the PISA 2018 data, 
the article addresses the topical national issue while also filling the research gap and 
contributing to the scientific discussions in the wider (global) citizenship education re-
search field.
In this framework, the paper aims to answer the following research questions: 
□ Do the self-assessed global competencies of students attending GEP and VEP in 
Slovenia differ significantly?
□ Do students in GEP and VEP report the same learning opportunities on global issues 
at school? 
□ How are the reported learning opportunities on global issues at school related to 
students’ awareness (i.e., knowledge) of global issues?
□ Are the differences between education programmes just as evident when students’ 
ESCS is taken into consideration? 
□ What are the implications of the research findings for policy and practice? 
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 71
2 Method
To answer the research questions, we conducted secondary analyses of the OECD 
PISA 2018 data for which the method (participants, instruments, and data analysis) is 
explained in the following paragraphs.
Participants
The final sample in the analysis includes a representative sample of 6074 15-year-
old male and female students, of whom 2882 (47 %) are female and 3192 (53 %) are 
male. 2054 (34 %) students attended GEP, 2578 (42 %) attended technical education 
programmes, and 1442 (24 %) students attended vocational education programmes of 
medium duration.
Instruments
After a 2-hour PISA 2018 reading, mathematics, and science literacy test, the stu-
dents completed the student questionnaire, which is used to identify the effects of dif-
ferent background factors on student achievement. For the analysis, we used students’ 
self-reports on their ESCS, global competencies, and learning opportunities on different 
global issues at school. 
PISA 2018 measured students’ self-reports on different Global competen-
cies scales: Self-efficacy regarding global issues; Awareness of global issues; At-
titudes towards immigrants; Interest in learning about other cultures; Perspective 
taking; Cognitive flexibility/adaptability; Respect for people from other cultures; 
Awareness of intercultural communication; and Sense of global-mindedness. All 
the mentioned scales and corresponding items are described in detail in the PISA 
2018 Technical Report (OECD, 2021). All the scales showed good internal consist-
ency for the Slovenian sample, with the coefficient alpha values ranging between 
α = .83 and α = .93 (OECD, 2021). Since we were especially interested in the connec-
tions between students’ self-reported awareness of global issues (i.e., knowledge about 
global issues) and their opportunities to learn about different global issues at school, we 
describe these two scales in more detail.
Students’ awareness of global issues was measured by PISA with the question “How 
informed are you about the following topics?”: “Climate change and global warming”, 
“Global health (e.g., epidemics)”, “Migration (movement of people)”, “International 
conflicts”, “Hunger or malnutrition in different parts of the world”, “Causes of poverty” 
and “Equality between men and women in different parts of the world”. Students rated 
the items on a four-point scale (ranging from 1 – I have never heard of this to 4 – I am 
familiar with this and I would be able to explain this well). 
Learning opportunities on global issues were measured by PISA with the question 
“Do you learn the following at school?” Students responded with “Yes” or “No” to the 
following items: “I learn how to solve conflicts with other people in our classrooms”, 
72 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
“I analyse global issues together with my classmates in small groups during class”, 
“I learn how people from different cultures can have different perspectives on some 
issues”, and “I learn how to communicate with people from different backgrounds”. 
The PISA 2018 Index of Economic, Social, and Cultural Status (ESCS) consists of 
data on the highest level of education attained by both parents, the parents’ occupation, 
and material and cultural goods in the home environment.
Data analysis
For the analysis, we used the standardized values of indices for Slovenia for stu-
dents’ ESCS and all the global competencies scales, and the percentages of students that 
answered “Yes’’ on each item on learning opportunities on the global issues scale. For 
all of the above, we used the existing values from the PISA 2018 database. 
To answer the research questions, we did the following in the analysis: 
□ we first compared the average value of the ESCS index between different 
education programmes in Slovenia; 
□ we compared the average values of global competence indices and the 
percentages of students that answered “Yes’’ on a specific learning oppor-
tunities scale between secondary GEP and VEP of medium duration; and 
□ we tested the correlations between students’ self-reported awareness of 
global issues and learning opportunities on global issues within GEP and 
VEP of medium duration. 
The statistical significance of differences between the groups of students was tested 
using a t-test at a significance level of p ≤ .05. For the correlations between the varia-
bles, the point-biserial correlation coefficient at a significance level of p ≤ .05 was used.
Data were analysed using the statistical software IEA IDB Analyzer (Version 
5.0.18). Due to two-stage sampling in the study and the use of weights for individual 
students (W_FSTUWT), this software also allowed us to use sample weights to prop-
erly assess the standard parameter errors in the population using the bootstrap method.
3 Results 
Results in Graph 1 show there are significant differences in students’ ESCS accord-
ing to the education programme they attend. The average value of the ESCS index in 
general upper-secondary education is .56, in technical education programmes -.07, and 
in vocational education programmes of medium duration -.41. 
The results indicate that education programmes in Slovenia represent relatively ho-
mogeneous groups of students according to the ESCS. Since the largest differences have 
been observed with regard to achievement, ESCS and other factors of student achieve-
ment and adaptive learning behaviour between GEP and VEP of medium duration – fur-
ther referred to as VEP – (e.g., Puklek Levpušček et al., 2012), in further analyses, we 
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 73
will be interested in the differences in global competencies and learning opportunities 
on global issues between these two groups of students.
Graph 1
Differences in Students’ ESCS According to Upper-Secondary Education Programme 
in Slovenia
Further results (Table 1) show that there are significant differences in all dimen-
sions of global competencies between students attending GEP and those attending VEP. 
Students in VEP reported low global competencies on all scales (below the OECD av-
erage). The largest differences in self-reported global competencies between the two 
groups were found in “Respect for people from other cultures” (.24 vs. -.49), “Self-
efficacy regarding global issues” (.16 vs. -.43) and “Awareness of global issues” (.22 
vs. -.37); the smallest differences were found in self-reported “Cognitive flexibility/
adaptability” (.08 vs. -.10).
74 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
Table 1
Self-Reported Global Competencies of Students in GEP and VEP
GEP VEP
M SE M SE
Respect for people from other cultures .24 .03 -.49 .03
Self-efficacy regarding global issues .16 .03 -.43 .03
Awareness of global issues .22 .03 -.37 .03
Awareness of intercultural communication .04 .03 -.53 .03
Attitudes towards immigrants .14 .03 -.34 .03
Interest in learning about other cultures .13 .03 -.30 .03
Sense of global-mindedness .08 .03 -.30 .04
Perspective taking .13 .03 -.15 .03
Cognitive flexibility/adaptability .08 .03 -.10 .03
Note. GEP – general upper-secondary education programme; VEP – vocational upper-
secondary programme of medium duration; M – mean; SE – standard error; Differences 
between the two groups are listed in descending order. All the differences between the 
groups proved to be statistically significant at the level of p ≤ .05.
The contrary was found in analysing the differences in self-reported learning op-
portunities on global issues between students attending GEP and those attending VEP. 
As is evident from Table 2, the results show that students who attended VEP on average 
reported a higher percentage of agreement with all the items on the scale, except for the 
item related to learning about other cultures in the classroom. 
Students from both programmes (Table 2) reported the highest percentage of agree-
ment with the item related to learning about other cultures in the classroom, and, in 
addition to this item, the highest percentage of agreement was also reported with the 
item relating to learning about conflict resolution with other people. Moreover, students 
from both education programmes reported the lowest percentages of agreement with the 
item related to reading newspapers, searching for news online, or watching news reports 
together in class, and with the item related to being asked by teachers for their opinion 
on international news in class.
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 75
Table 2
Self-Reported Learning Opportunities on Global Issues between Students in GEP and VEP
GEP VEP
% SE % SE
I learn about the interconnectedness 
of countries’ economies. 35.60 1.46 56.13 1.50
I learn how to solve conflicts with 
other people in our classrooms. 53.28 1.37 58.74 1.57
I learn about different cultures. 71.99 1.60 62.76 1.43
We read newspapers, look for news on the Internet 
or watch the news together during classes. 20.39 1.24 37.47 1.73
I am often invited by my teachers to give my 
personal opinion about international news. 28.60 1.26 40.58 1.62
I participate in events celebrating cultural 
diversity throughout the school year. 29.93 1.60 38.61 1.52
I participate in classroom discussions about 
world events as part of the regular instruction. 36.35 1.70 44.28 1.84
I analyse global issues together with my 
classmates in small groups during class. 29.16 1.57 43.14 1.47
I learn how people from different cultures can 
have different perspectives on some issues. 42.13 1.44 49.81 1.84
I learn how to communicate with people 
from different backgrounds. 44.77 1.49 50.47 1.70
Note. GEP – general upper-secondary education programme; VEP – vocational upper-
secondary education programme of medium duration; % – percentage of students that 
responded with a “Yes’’; SE – standard error.
The results so far indicate that students who attended VEP, i.e., students with lower 
ESCS, on average reported significantly lower global competencies, but on the contrary, 
greater learning opportunities on global issues than their peers who attended GEP. This 
indicates that students’ ESCS does not play an important role in students’ self-reported 
learning opportunities on global issues. 
Further results are in line with these findings. As is evident from Table 3, the results 
show that students’ self-reported awareness of global issues (i.e., their knowledge of 
global issues) is significantly low but negatively correlated with all the items on learning 
opportunities on the global issues scale, regardless of the education programme, with 
values of correlation coefficients ranging from -.13 to -.02 in general upper-secondary 
education programmes and from -.12 to .00 in vocational education programmes. 
76 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
Table 3
Correlation Coefficients between Students’ Self-Reported Awareness of Global Issues 
and Learning Opportunities on Global Issues in GEP and VEP
GEP VEP
rpb SE rpb SE
Awareness of global issues 1.00 .00 1.00 .00
I learn about the interconnectedness 
of countries’ economies. -.07** .04 -.11** .03
I learn how to solve conflicts with 
other people in our classrooms. -.07** .04 -.12** .04
I learn about different cultures. -.09** .03 -.08** .04
We read newspapers, look for news on the Internet 
or watch the news together during classes. -.02* .04 -.05* .04
I am often invited by my teachers to give my 
personal opinion about international news. -.05* .04 -.01* .04
I participate in events celebrating cultural 
diversity throughout the school year. -.12** .04 -.01* .04
I participate in classroom discussions about 
world events as part of the regular instruction. -.13** .04 .00 .04
I analyse global issues together with my 
classmates in small groups during class. -.05* .03 .00 .04
I learn how people from different cultures can 
have different perspectives on some issues. -.05* .03 -.11** .04
I learn how to communicate with people 
from different backgrounds. -.06** .03 -.06** .03
Note. GEP – general upper-secondary education programme; VEP – vocational upper-
secondary education programme of medium duration; r – point-biserial correlation 
coefficient; SE – standard error; ** Correlation is significant at the level of p ≤ .01; 
* Correlation is significant at the level of p ≤ .05.
4 Discussion
The results show that Slovenian students in VEP report significantly lower global 
competencies in comparison to students in GEP. This holds for all nine dimensions of 
global competencies. These results are consistent with the existing research on stu-
dents’ civic competencies, e.g., students in GEP have greater civic knowledge and more 
positive attitudes towards migrants (e.g., Dijkstra et al., 2021). The results, which show 
that Slovenian students in VEP report greater learning opportunities on global issues 
at school, are not consistent with the existing research, which mainly highlights fewer 
learning opportunities on (global) citizenship issues in VEP. Finally, the results show 
that students’ reports about the learning opportunities on global issues at school are 
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 77
negatively related to the reported awareness of global issues (i.e., knowledge of global 
issues). These are not consistent with the results, which show that learning opportunities 
on global issues in most OECD countries are positively related to global competencies 
(OECD, 2020). 
These findings raise several questions about the organization and content of global 
citizenship learning in VEP in Slovenia. Firstly, it raises the question of the quality of 
these learning opportunities (Oblak and Lavrič, 2019), for which it can be argued that 
effectiveness is limited. However, the question of the reliability of students’ understand-
ing and reporting about the learning opportunities should not be neglected in this regard. 
Secondly, it calls into question the compensating role of vocational schools in promoting 
students’ global competencies. Taking into consideration the existing research findings 
that ESCS is an important individual factor related to global competencies (e.g., Smith 
et al., 2017), also in Slovenia, and that students with low ESCS are mainly involved in 
VEP, it seems that vocational schools in Slovenia do not compensate this individual fac-
tor and do not enable deprivileged students to develop global competencies in schools. 
5 Conclusions
In 2024, Slovenia is in the process of renewing the curricula and preparing a new 
programme for education for the next decade, which makes the results of this article 
topical and policy relevant. The article shows that in the area of global competencies, 
just as in the area of basic competencies (reading, math, science literacy), ensuring equal 
opportunities and thus equity remains one of the important challenges of the Slovenian 
education system (cf. Cankar et al., 2017; Šterman Ivančič and Štremfel, 2020). The 
revealed differences in the global competencies of students in general and vocational 
education programmes support the idea (e.g., Demaine, 2002) that global competen-
cies shed light on (in)equality and (in)just opportunities of citizens within nation-states 
(Sinjur, 2016). This has implications for educational practice. 
First of all, the students’ backgrounds (e.g., ESCS, academic abilities) should be 
taken into consideration when planning effective learning opportunities on global issues 
(e.g., Van de Werfhorst, 2017). Taking into consideration the discussion about the aim 
of vocational education, it is important that it not only pursues the employability goal 
(Kunc et al., 2020), but the active citizenship dimension as well. From this perspective, 
the basic knowledge about the global world should be strengthened. Studies (e.g., Di-
jkstra et al., 2021) report that this is often lacking in VEP, but is crucial and necessary 
for developing all other virtues of modern global citizens, e.g., skills, attitudes, values 
(Štremfel and Šterman Ivančič, 2022). As highlighted by Nylund et al. (2020), these 
learning opportunities should be focused not only on general subjects but also on vo-
cational ones, as these hold the same dispositions for global citizenship learning. Thus, 
VEP would fulfil their compensating role in developing the global competencies of their 
students. 
78 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
Dr. Urška Štremfel, dr. Klaudija Šterman Ivančič
Primerjava globalnih kompetenc v gimnazijskem 
in poklicnem izobraževanju
Izzivi globalizacije sprožajo potrebo, da izobraževalni sistemi posebno pozornost 
namenijo izobraževanju globalnih državljanov, ki bodo lahko s svojimi globalnimi kom-
petencami uspešno delovali v vse bolj soodvisnem, multikulturnem in hitro spreminjajo-
čem se svetu. Slovenija je v letu 2018 sodelovala v raziskavi PISA (Program mednaro-
dne primerjave dosežkov učencev), ki je prvič spremljala globalne kompetence učencev 
in učenk v mednarodni primerjalni perspektivi. Te v skladu s konceptualnim okvirom 
raziskave vključujejo preučevanje lokalnih, globalnih in medkulturnih vprašanj, razu-
mevanje in spoštovanje različnih pogledov na svet, vključevanje v pozitivne interakcije 
z ljudmi iz različnih kultur in aktivno delovanje za skupno blaginjo ter trajnostni razvoj 
(OECD, 2020). Rezultati raziskave kažejo, da so slovenski učenci in učenke, v primerjavi 
z vrstniki iz držav OECD, poročali o statistično značilno nižjih globalnih kompetencah. 
Medtem ko je bila dosedanja raziskovalna pozornost v Sloveniji namenjena predvsem 
individualnim dejavnikom, ki osvetljujejo navedene rezultate, se v prispevku osredoto-
čamo na šolske dejavnike oziroma na razlike v poročanih globalnih kompetencah ter 
priložnostih za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc med učenci in učenkami gimnazijskih in 
poklicnih srednješolskih programov. S tem zapolnjujemo raziskovalne vrzeli ter prispe-
vamo k znanstvenim razpravam na širšem področju razvoja (globalnih) državljanskih 
kompetenc v šolskem okolju. Redke obstoječe raziskave sicer kažejo, da je v programih 
poklicnega izobraževanja, v primerjavi z gimnazijskimi programi, manj pozornosti na-
menjene (globalni) državljanski vzgoji. To je razvidno ne le v učnih načrtih in drugih 
priložnostih za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v šoli, državljanskemu znanju in dispo-
zicijah učencev in učenk, ampak tudi v pogledih družbe in učiteljev na cilje (globalne) 
državljanske vzgoje v različnih izobraževalnih programih (npr. Leenders idr., 2008; Van 
Goethem idr., 2020). Neenak dostop do priložnosti za razvoj državljanskih kompetenc je 
bil v raziskavah prepoznan kot pomemben dejavnik, ki prispeva k socialno-ekonomskim 
neenakostim pri kasnejšem državljanskem udejstvovanju (Hoskins idr., 2021) in tako 
vpliva na socialno kohezivnost družbe (npr. Van Goethem idr., 2020).
V prispevku odgovarjamo na naslednja raziskovalna vprašanja: Ali učenci in učen-
ke gimnazijskih in poklicnih srednješolskih programov v Sloveniji poročajo o enaki 
ravni globalnih kompetenc? Ali učenci in učenke v gimnazijskih in poklicnih srednje-
šolskih programih poročajo o enakih priložnosti za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v 
šoli? Kako so poročane priložnosti za učenje o globalnih vprašanjih v šoli povezane s 
poročanim zavedanjem učencev o globalnih vprašanjih? Ali so razlike med izobraževal-
nimi programi prav tako značilne, če upoštevamo socialno-ekonomski status učencev in 
učenk? Kakšne implikacije prinašajo rezultati za politiko in prakso? Da bi odgovorili 
na raziskovalna vprašanja, smo izvedli sekundarne analize podatkov OECD PISA 2018. 
Končni vzorec v analizi zajema reprezentativen vzorec 6074 15-letnih učencev in učenk, 
od tega 2882 (47 %) učenk in 3192 (53 %) učencev. 2054 (34 %) učencev in učenk je 
obiskovalo gimnazijske programe, 2578 (42 %) programe tehničnega izobraževanja in 
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 79
1442 (24 %) programe srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja. Podatke smo analizirali s 
statističnim programom IBM SPSS 27.0 in z orodjem IEA IDBAnalyzer Version 4.0.35.
V raziskavi PISA 2018 so učenci in učenke podali samooceno na različnih lestvicah 
globalnih kompetenc: samoučinkovitost pri pojasnjevanju globalnih vprašanj, zaveda-
nje o globalnih vprašanjih, odnos do priseljencev, zanimanje za spoznavanje drugih 
kultur, razumevanje perspektive drugih, spretnost miselnega prilagajanja, spoštovanje 
ljudi iz drugih kultur, spretnost medkulturne komunikacije, odzivnost na globalna vpra-
šanja in diskriminatorno vedenje učiteljev na šoli. Vse lestvice so za slovenski vzo-
rec pokazale dobro notranjo skladnost, saj so se vrednosti koeficienta alfa gibale med 
α = 0,83 in α = 0,93 (OECD, 2021). V prispevku nas je še posebej zanimala povezava 
med samooceno učenčevega zavedanja o globalnih vprašanjih (tj. znanja o globalnih 
vprašanjih) in njihovimi priložnostmi za učenje o različnih globalnih vprašanjih v šoli. 
Pri ugotavljanju zavedanja o globalnih vprašanjih so učenci in učenke odgovarjali na 
vprašanje “Koliko si obveščen/-a o naslednjih problemih?” Pripadajoče postavke so 
ocenili na štiristopenjski lestvici (1 – Nikoli nisem slišal/-a za to do 4 – Ta problem po-
znam in bi lahko precej dobro pojasnil/-a, za kaj gre), primeri postavk pa so naslednji: 
“Podnebne spremembe in globalno segrevanje”, “Svetovno zdravje (npr. epidemije)”, 
“Preseljevanje (selitev ljudi)” ipd. Priložnosti za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v šoli 
je raziskava PISA ugotavljala z vprašanjem “Se v šoli učiš naslednje?” Učenci in učen-
ke so na pripadajoče postavke odgovorili z “Da” ali “Ne”, ocenili pa so deset postavk, 
ki se nanašajo na različne globalne kompetence, npr.: “Učim se o medsebojni poveza-
nosti gospodarstev držav”, “V razredu se učim reševati spore z drugimi ljudmi”, “Pri 
rednem pouku se udeležujem razrednih razprav o svetovnih dogodkih”, “Učim se, kako 
se sporazumevati z ljudmi iz drugačnih kulturnih ozadij”. Indeks socialno-ekonomske-
ga statusa učencev in učenk je v raziskavi PISA (2018) sestavljen iz podatkov o najvišji 
stopnji dosežene izobrazbe obeh staršev, poklicu staršev ter materialnih in kulturnih 
dobrinah v domačem okolju.
Rezultati kažejo, da v Sloveniji obstajajo velike razlike v socialno-ekonomskem statu-
su učencev in učenk glede na srednješolski izobraževalni program, ki ga obiskujejo. Pov-
prečna vrednost indeksa v gimnazijskih programih je 0,56, v programih tehničnega po-
klicnega izobraževanja –0,07, v programih srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja pa –0,41.
Rezultati kažejo, da učenci in učenke v gimnazijskih programih v primerjavi z učen-
ci in učenkami v poklicnih srednješolskih programih poročajo o pomembno višjih glo-
balnih kompetencah v vseh dimenzijah globalnih kompetenc (odnos do priseljencev, 
zanimanje za spoznavanje drugih kultur, razumevanje perspektive drugih, spretnost mi-
selnega prilagajanja, spoštovanje ljudi iz drugih kultur, spretnost medkulturne komu-
nikacije, odzivnost na globalna vprašanja, diskriminatorno vedenje učiteljev na šoli). 
Nasprotno rezultati kažejo, da so učenci in učenke v poklicnih srednješolskih pro-
gramih v primerjavi z učenci in učenkami v gimnazijskih programih poročali o več 
priložnostih za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v šoli pri vseh postavkah, razen pri po-
stavki, ki se nanaša na učenje o drugačnih kulturah, pri kateri so o več priložnostih 
poročali učenci in učenke gimnazijskih programov. 
Nadalje rezultati kažejo, da je samoocena učenčevega zavedanja o globalnih vpra-
šanjih (tj. znanja o globalnih vprašanjih) negativno povezana z vsemi postavkami, ki se 
80 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
nanašajo na samooceno priložnosti za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v šoli ne glede na 
srednješolski izobraževalni program, ki ga obiskujejo učenci in učenke. 
Rezultati odpirajo več vprašanj o organizaciji in vsebini učenja globalnega dr-
žavljanstva v programih srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja v Sloveniji. Postavlja se 
vprašanje kakovosti priložnosti za usvajanje globalnih kompetenc, za katere je na pod-
lagi rezultatov prispevka mogoče trditi, da je njihova učinkovitost omejena. Rezultati 
prav tako postavljajo pod vprašaj kompenzacijsko vlogo programov srednjega poklic-
nega izobraževanja pri razvoju globalnih kompetenc učencev in učenk. Upoštevajoč 
raziskave, da je socialno-ekonomski status pomemben individualni dejavnik pri usva-
janju globalnih kompetenc (npr. Smith idr., 2017), tudi v Sloveniji, in da so v programe 
srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja v Sloveniji vključeni učenci in učenke z nižjim soci-
alno-ekonomskim statusom kot v gimnazijske programe, je mogoče trditi, da programi 
srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja v Sloveniji ne kompenzirajo tega individualnega 
dejavnika in deprivilegiranim učencem in učenkam ne omogočajo, da bi globalne kom-
petence uspešno razvijali v šoli. 
Prispevek prikazuje, da tako kot na področju temeljnih kompetenc (bralna, mate-
matična, naravoslovna pismenost), tudi na področju globalnih kompetenc zagotavljanje 
enakih možnosti in s tem pravičnosti ostaja eden izmed pomembnih izzivov slovenske-
ga izobraževalnega sistema (prim. Cankar et al., 2017; Šterman Ivančič in Štremfel, 
2020). Identificirane razlike v globalnih kompetencah učencev in učenk v programih 
gimnazijskega in srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja podpirajo idejo (npr. Demaine, 
2002), da globalne kompetence osvetljujejo (ne)enakost in (ne)pravične možnosti drža-
vljanov znotraj nacionalnih držav. 
Rezultati implicirajo, da je treba pri načrtovanju učinkovitih priložnosti za usva-
janje globalnih kompetenc v šoli upoštevati individualno ozadje učencev in učenk, kot 
sta socialno-ekonomski status in akademske sposobnosti (Van de Werfhorst, 2017). V 
razpravah o prihodnosti srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja je pomembno poudariti, 
da ta ne zasleduje le cilja zaposljivosti, temveč tudi razsežnost aktivnega državljan-
stva, pri tem pa tudi v poklicnih programih krepiti temeljno znanje o globaliziranem 
svetu. Raziskave (npr. Dijkstra idr., 2021) kažejo, da je slednja dimenzija v programih 
srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja pogosto prezrta, a ključna za razvoj vseh drugih 
vrlin sodobnih globalnih državljanov (spretnosti, stališč, vrednot) (Štremfel in Šterman 
Ivančič, 2022). Kot poudarjajo Nylund in drugi (2020) bi morale biti priložnosti za 
usvajanje globalnih kompetenc v srednjem poklicnem izobraževanju zagotovljene ne 
le pri splošnih, temveč tudi poklicnih predmetih, saj imajo ti enake dispozicije za uče-
nje globalnega državljanstva. Kot taki bi programi srednjega poklicnega izobraževanja 
uspešneje izpolnjevali svojo kompenzacijsko vlogo pri razvoju globalnih kompetenc 
vseh, tudi deprivilegiranih učencev in učenk. 
REFERENCES
1. Andevski, M., Maletaški, T. and Banić, B. (2019). Odgovornost za prihodnost – trajnostni ra-
zvoj z vidika študentov. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 34(2), 173–192. 
2. Bourn, D. (2020). The Emergence of Global Education as a Distinctive Pedagogical Field. In: 
Bourn, D. (Ed.). The Bloomsbury Handbook of Global Education and Learning (pp. 11–22). 
London: Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350108769.0009 
Štremfel, PhD, Šterman Ivančič, PhD: Comparison of Global Competencies in General... 81
3. Cankar, G., Bren, M. and Zupanc, D. (2017). Za večjo pravičnost šolskega sistema v Sloveniji. 
Ljubljana: Državni izpitni center. 
4. Demaine, J. (2002). Globalisation and Citizenship Education. International Journal Studies in 
Sociology of Education, 12(2), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210200200086 
5. Dijkstra, A. B., ten Dam, G. and Munniksma, A. (2021). Inequality in Citizenship Competences. 
Citizenship Education and Policy in the Netherlands. In: Malak-Minkiewicz, B. and Torney-
-Purta, J. (Ed.). Influences of the IEA Civic and Citizenship Education Studies (pp. 135–146). 
Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71102-3_12 
6. Duarte, J. and Robinson-Jones, C. (2022). Bridging Theory and Practice: Conceptualisations 
of Global Citizenship Education in Dutch Secondary Education. Globalisation, Societies and 
Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2022.2048800
7. European Parliament (2022). Report on the Implementation of Citizenship Education Actions 
(2021/2008(INI)). 
8. Hoskins, B., Huang, L. and Arensmeier, C. (2021). Socioeconomic Inequalities in Civic Lear-
ning in Nordic Schools: Identifying the Potential of In-School Civic Participation for Disadvan-
taged Students. In: Biseth, H., Hoskins, B. and Huang, L. (Ed.). Northern Lights on Civic and 
Citizenship Education: A Cross-national Comparison of Nordic Data from ICCS (pp. 91–120). 
Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66788-7_5 
9. Hoskins, B., Janmaat, J. G., Han, C. et al. (2014). Inequalities in the Education System and the 
Reproduction of Socioeconomic Disparities in Voting in England, Denmark and Germany: The 
Influence of Country Context, Tracking and Self-Efficacy on Voting Intentions of Students Age 
16–18. Compare: a Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46(1), 69–92. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2014.912796 
10. Jerković, L., Ilić, M. and Josifović Elezović, S. (2018). The Effects of Civic Education Instruc-
tion. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 33(3–4), 55–65. 
11. Kunc, P., Čepar, Ž. and Likar, B. (2020). Učinkovito povezovanje srednjega šolstva in gospo-
darstva v Sloveniji. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 35(2), 95–113. 
12. Leenders, H., Veugelers, W. and De Kat, E. (2008). Teachers’ Views on Citizenship Education 
in Secondary Education in The Netherlands. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(2), 155–170. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802063106 
13. Oblak, J. and Lavrič, M. (2019). Percepcije predmeta domovinska in državljanska kultura ter 
etika. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 34(2), 34–51. 
14. OECD (2018). Preparing our Youth for an Inclusive and Sustainable World. The OECD PISA 
Global Competence Framework. OECD Publishing. 
15. OECD (2020). PISA 2018 results (Volume VI): Are Students Ready to Thrive in an Intercon-
nected World? OECD Publishing. 
16. OECD (2021). PISA 2018 Technical Report. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/pisa-
2018technicalreport/
17. Nylund, M., Ledman, K., Rosvall, P-Å. et al. (2020). Socialisation and Citizenship Preparation 
in Vocational Education: Pedagogic Codes and Democratic Rights in VET-Subjects. British Jo-
urnal of Sociology of Education, 41(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2019.1665498 
18. Puklek Levpušček, M., Podlesek, A. and Šterman Ivančič, K. (2012). Dejavniki bralne pisme-
nosti v raziskavi PISA 2009. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut. https://www.doi.org/10.32320/978-
961-270-138-3 
19. Sinjur, A. (2016). Citizenship Education in Great Britain. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška ob-
zorja, 31(2), 150–163. 
20. Smith, W. C., Fraser, P., Chykina, V. et al. (2017). Global Citizenship and the Importance of 
Education in a Globally Integrated World. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(5), 648–
665. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2016.1222896 
21. Šterman Ivančič, K. and Štremfel, U. (2020). Assessment Policy and Practice of Slovenia. In: 
Harju-Luukkainen, H., Mcelvany, N. and Stang, J. (Ed.). Monitoring Student Achievement 
in the 21st Century: European Policy Perspectives and Assessment Strategies (pp. 237–249). 
Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38969-7_19 
22. Štremfel, U. and Šterman Ivančič, K. (2022). Global Competencies of Slovenian Students. Pe-
dagogika, 148(4), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.15823/p.2022.148.9 
82 Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja (1, 2024)
23. Van Goethem, A., ten Dam, G. and Dijkstra, A. B. (2020). What does Society want Adolescents 
to Know about Civics? Research Papers in Education, 37(5), 707–728. https://doi.org/10.1080
/02671522.2020.1864767 
24. Van de Werfhorst, H. G. (2017). Vocational and Academic Education and Political Engagement: 
the Importance of the Educational Institutional Structure. Comparative Education Review, 
61(1), 111–140. https://doi.org/10.1086/689613 
25. Van der Wal, M. and Waslander, S. (2007). Traditional and Non-traditional Educational Out-
comes: Trade-Off or Complementarity? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 18(4), 
409–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450701712502 
Študijo finančno podpirata Javna agencija za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije v okviru 
raziskovalnega programa Edukacijske raziskave (P5–0106) in Ministrstvo za izobraževanje, 
znanost in šport Republike Slovenije v okviru Letnega programa dela Pedagoškega inštituta za leti 
2021 in 2022.
The study is financially supported by the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency in the 
framework of the research programme Educational Research (P5–0106) and by the Ministry of 
Education, Science, and Sport of the Republic of Slovenia in the framework of the Annual Working 
Programme of the Educational Research Institute for 2021 and 2022. 
Besedilo / Text © 2024 Avtor(ji) / The Author(s)
To delo je objavljeno pod licenco CC BY Priznanje avtorstva 4.0 Mednarodna. 
This work is published under a licence CC BY Attribution 4.0 International.
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Dr. Urška Štremfel, znanstvena sodelavka na Pedagoškem inštitutu v Ljubljani, Slovenija.
E–mail: urska.stremfel@pei.si 
Dr. Klaudija Šterman Ivančič, znanstvena sodelavka na Pedagoškem inštitutu v Ljubljani, Slovenija.
E–mail: klaudija.sterman@pei.si