Global history has established itself in the past decades. The challenge posed to history as a discipline by the questioning of narratives of modernisation and progress and a new sensitivity to Eurocentric biases and methodological nationalisms has been followed by the establishment of professorships in global history and the creation of study programmes on Master and PhD level. While global history as a field and perspective has entered a reflective moment, now is also the time to critically evaluate the ways we teach global history. For it is not only the subject of history that has changed as a result of the conceptual and methodological critique of the global turn, but the students who demand these new study and training programmes in global history have also changed: (a) They are more international and mobile, coming from very different educational systems and cultural backgrounds and often sharing English as their (only) common language, regardless of where they are studying. (b) They are “digital natives”, researching their knowledge on the world wide web rather than in libraries, write their academic papers with the support of AI, educate themselves and their political opinions via podcasts and social media and establish and maintain many of their social contacts via virtual platorms and channels. (c) Often, they study the new Master and doctoral programmes in global history because they identify with the critique of globalization more narrowly defined, because they want to link their research interest to a life topic of their own, and because they have the aim to make a difference in the world. Valeska Huber and Juliane Schiel (University of Vienna, Austria) discuss the challenges of global history teaching and the new generation of students with Manuela Boatcă (University of Freiburg, Germany), Bernhard C. Schär (University of Lausanne, Switzerland), Fabio Heupel Santos (University of Copenhagen, Denmark) and the former Erasmus Mundus Global Studies master student Moiz Rehan (University of Vienna, Austria) in a Roundtable. The discussion will be organised around three major themes: (1) Trainers and trainees of global history: How does intercultural and intergenerational academic understanding work between a relatively homogeneous generation of global historians, who have been trained in Western educational institutions and an extremely heterogeneous generation of students of global history who come together from all over the world and find each other through political issues and concerns? (2) Academic curiosity and positionality: What is the relationship between the object of research and one's own identity? How do open-ended research and political activism go together? Are (scientific) arguments and (political) opinions a contradiction? (3) Curricula and labour markets: For which jobs, and above all for which world, are we training the current generation of students? Do our curricula match the demands that this generation will face in the academic and non-academic labour markets?