International impact and international relevance are increasingly identified as features of quality research. Reviewers of grant proposals and editors of journals are required to reflect upon both of these terms when making decisions about projects that should be funded, and papers that should be published. Of course, “international” is not a term with a single meaning, and some forms of international collaboration and some measures of international impact, have historically been more valued than others. Some authors, universities, countries, and languages as well as some disciplines, theoretical frameworks, methodological approaches and sources of data, have consistently been accorded more respect than others. Similarly, some conversations focused on the aims, outcomes and possibilities associated with teacher education are characterised as much by what they exclude as who and what they include. These patterns of inclusion and exclusion can be seen, for example, in efforts to establish “international” frameworks regarding what teacher education should involve and “international” measures of quality teaching outcomes. In other words, many conversations, agendas and intellectual frameworks graced with the label “international” are simply globally circulated narratives conforming to traditional, Eurocentric ways of making sense of the world.