全球化的過程對世界各地的教育產生深刻的影響。本文著重於兩個議題，而這兩個議題分別導引出學術文獻上不同但頗具爭議性的討論。第一個問題是什麼是全球化? 學者們主張全球化所涵蓋的層面應該是多面相的而非單一的情況，而全球化與經濟、政治、社會文化層面所造成的影響相結合。本文中討論的第二個議題即是全球化對世界各地教育所造成的影響為何? 全球化對課程與教學所造成的直接影響相形之下是較小的，然而，全球化對於經濟體制的重建以及結合經濟、政治意識等問題所造成的影響更為明顯。新自由經濟改革及政策上結構性調整導致教育供給私有化的增加，加上採用新式管理及專業化的論述以應付當前市場為導向的現代化教育。有關於全球化對教育的影響研究建議：相對於一些極致全球學家(hyperglobalist) 所預測的國家的權力將衰退，事實上，國家對教育的掌控及影響力依然很大。國家如何回應全球化對教育上所產生的影響之異同，本文將以兩個質性比較研究案例說明之：英格蘭與芬蘭小學教師工作之比較及英格蘭與紐西蘭之比較。另一方面，在芬蘭，全球化的壓力藉由已存在的社會福利主義及社會公平等國家意識所傳達。因而導致英格蘭及芬蘭全球化市場回應的中斷，例如：英格蘭實施國家課程制度，芬蘭則去除先前制定的國家課程制度，取而代之的是學校課程制度，並爭辯如此的做法反而較為適切，認為特別適合全球化時代所追求彈性化及終身教育的理念。此外，不同於英格蘭近年來發展以目標為導向及重視審查制度的文化，芬蘭則放棄公立學校審查制度改為學校自行評鑑的機制。同時，紐西蘭政府與英格蘭一樣追求所謂新自由市場的理念，針對課程與教學的回應仍持續當中，但回應的方式介於英格蘭及芬蘭兩國之間。英格蘭、芬蘭及紐西蘭各國對課程及教學的改變有其極度相似之處，但強烈審查機制的文化及小學「新專業化」的論述在各國發展之中。

The processes of globalisation are having profound effects on education across the world. The paper addresses two questions, each of which has led to a variety of controversies in the academic literature. The first is ‘what is globalisation?’ It is argued that the latter is a multi-faceted rather than a singular condition that is associated with various consequences at the economic, political and socio-cultural levels. The second question is ‘how is globalisation affecting education world-wide?’ The direct impact of globalisation on curriculum and pedagogy has been relatively small. However, the more general effects of economic restructuring and associated economic and political ideologies have been great. The implementation of neo-liberal economic reforms and associated structural adjustment policies have led to the increasing privatisation of educational provision, with the emergence of a new managerial and professional discourse adapted to a competitive market-led model of education. Research on the impact of globalisation on education suggests that, contrary to the predictions of some hyperglobalists that the influence of nation states would wither away, national control over education has remained strong. The similarities and differences in national educational responses to global pressures are illustrated in the paper by two comparative qualitative research projects comparing the work of primary school teachers in England and Finland and England and New Zealand respectively. On the one hand, in Finland, the pressures of globalisation have been mediated by pre-existing national ideologies of social welfarism and equity. This has led to marked discontinuities of response in England and Finland. For example, where England introduced a national curriculum, Finland dismantled its previous national curriculum and moved instead to school-based curricula, arguing that this was more appropriate for the kind of flexible and lifelong learning approach required in a globalised era. In addition, unlike the strong target-based and audit culture developed recently in England, Finland abandoned its national school inspection system and moved to a policy of school self-evaluation. On the other hand, in New Zealand, whose government shared with England a neo-liberal market ideology, there were strong continuities in response between the two countries. There were very similar changes to curriculum and pedagogy and the development in each country of a strong audit culture and discourse of ‘new professionalism’ in primary schools.