Recontextualising Geography in Education (International Perspectives on Geographical Education) 3030737217, 9783030737214

Citation preview

International Perspectives on Geographical Education

Mary Fargher David Mitchell Emma Till   Editors

Recontextualising Geography in Education

International Perspectives on Geographical Education Series Editors Clare Brooks, UCL Institute of Education, London, UK Di Wilmot, Education Department, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, Eastern Cape, South Africa

This series is under the editorial supervision of the International Geography Union’s Commission on Geographical Education. Led by the priorities and criteria set out in the Commission’s Declaration on Geography Education Research, the series plays an important role in making geography education research accessible to the global community. Publications within the series are drawn from meetings, conferences and symposiums supported by the Commission. Individual book editors are selected for special editions that correspond to the Commission’s ongoing programme of work and from suitable submissions to the series editors. In this way, research published represents immediate developments within the international geography education community. The series seeks to support the development of early career researchers in publishing high quality, high impact research accounts. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15101

Mary Fargher • David Mitchell • Emma Till Editors

Recontextualising Geography in Education

Editors Mary Fargher Institute of Education University College London London, UK

David Mitchell Institute of Education University College London London, UK

Emma Till University of Winchester Winchester, UK

ISSN 2367-2773     ISSN 2367-2781 (electronic) International Perspectives on Geographical Education ISBN 978-3-030-73721-4    ISBN 978-3-030-73722-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Contents

1 Introduction����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Mary Fargher, David Mitchell, and Emma Till Part I Theorising Recontextualising Geography 2 The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios: An Overview������������������������������    9 David Lambert, Tine Béneker, and Gabriel Bladh 3 Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’��������������������������������������������������������������������������   25 Alaric Maude 4 Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies����������������������������������   41 Matt Finn 5 Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography������������������������������   55 Simon Catling 6 A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers’ Professional Practice����������������������   71 Grace Healy 7 The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful Knowledge: A Study of Sixth Form Geography Students ����������������������������������������   89 Daniel Whittall 8 Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence ������������������������������������������������������������  109 Osvaldo Muñiz Solari

v

vi

Contents

9 Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning in Geography Classes ����������������������������������������  129 Pola Serwene 10 Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living in the Slums of Nairobi, Kenya����������������������  149 Andreas Eberth 11 From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People for Sustainable Production and Consumption����������  167 Christiane Meyer and Christine Höbermann 12 Conclusion������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  185 Mary Fargher, David Mitchell, and Emma Till

Chapter 1

Introduction Mary Fargher, David Mitchell, and Emma Till

1.1  Why Recontextualise Geography in Education? In April 2019, over 80 geographers, educationists and teachers assembled in London to take part in a 2 day IGU-CGE conference entitled ‘Recontextualising Geography’. Invited speakers were asked to present on one of the most challenging issues for geography teachers and educators, how geography’s ‘big ideas’ such as space, place, interconnection and scale can be effectively recontextualised in school education. This, conference followed on from the 2015 symposium where the geography education got together to consider ‘The Power of Geographical Thinking’. Reflecting on the rationale behind the shift to the 2019 ‘Recontextualising Geography’ theme, David Lambert commented: it seemed natural that the intellectual gaze of international geography educationists should shift more specifically on the relationship between geography as it is manifest as a school subject and the academic discipline in university departments which (presumably) nourishes it (Lambert, 2019, p.257)

Processes of recontextualisation can be interpreted as the ways in which knowledge is selected from the fields in which it is produced, and transformed into school curricula, textbooks, lessons and ultimately into what students learn (Firth, 2017). The idea of recontextualisation originates in the work of Basil Bernstein (2000) who coined the term with regards to his theoretical model of the ‘pedagogic device’

M. Fargher (*) · D. Mitchell Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] E. Till University of Winchester, Winchester, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_1

1

2

M. Fargher et al.

through which he considered how disciplinary knowledge (most usually associated with universities) is translated into forms of subject knowledge (most usually associated with schools). After the well-received Springer publication ‘The Power of Geographical Thinking’ (Brooks et al., 2017), the editors were keen to publish another book in the ‘International Perspectives on Geographical Education’ series. It is important therefore to state right at the beginning of the book that it is not simply a set of conference proceedings. From the start of the process, contributors were provided with guidelines for their writing, the chapters selected were chosen on the basis of their quality and relevance to the overall theme of the book, chapter drafts were reviewed, discussed and where required re-written with editorial assistance. As is always the case, it will be up to the readers of the book to decide if we have been successful in our aims. It is important at this point to also emphasise the significance of the nature of the geography education research landscape that this book is contributing to. Geography education research continues to be poorly-funded, sometimes under-theorised and largely populated by initial teacher education university academics (an area in itself equally under-funded (Brooks et al., 2017). This on-going challenging background and the quality of presentations and debate at the 2019 London conference gave the editors impetus to publish this volume to contribute to an area of geography education research ‘ recontextualising geography in education’ which is relatively under-­ represented in the existing literature. The book’s acceptance in the International Perspectives on Geographical Education Springer series is therefore significant. The series has a growing and influential part to play in identifying elements of the research field that are thought to be significant by both researchers and practitioners and that may have been under-explored or which are considered worthy of re-­ visiting. This volume fits Springer’s remit well in this regard. It is useful to pause at this point and re-visit why the study of geography in schools remains vital and why we as editors believe that it is timely to publish a book like this one that focuses on the opportunities and challenges of recontextualising geography in education. In particular, when we sat down as editors to plan the book we began from a starting point that though challenging in transforming knowledge from the discipline to the subject, geography is exceptional in having the conceptual tools to draw together and make sense of the physical and the human elements of our planet (Matthews & Herbert, 2008). Geography teachers as arguably the key agents of change in the processes of recontextualising geography in education are central to this. If an argument is to be made for the role of geography being central to the education of all young people in making sense of their complex and dynamic world and their place and responsibilities in it, then focusing on how school geography is constructed by the academic discipline, teachers and students, is therefore essential. It is often the case, in this kind of discourse that when geographers are asked to justify their subject and their ‘tools of the trade’ that they refer to the value and use of maps (surely the cornerstone of good geography?). Several often cite the ‘power of geography’ in the story of Dr. John Snow, the London doctor working against the

1 Introduction

3

odds of a cholera epidemic in Victorian England.Snow traced the source of the contaminated water that bore the disease via a map of the break out area in London’s Soho. He and his students made the geographical connection between an exponential clustering of cases around the now infamous cholera –ridden Broad Street water pump. Their pleas to city officials to close the site were initially rejected for fear of riot if inhabitants did not have access to nearby water during the height of the infection. Snow and his followers took things into their own hands, filled in the source and cases rapidly reduced. Today the same raison d’etre, for the power of geographical thinking can be seen in the ways that GIS technology can help modern epidemiology: Today things are not that simple, but maps still help modern epidemiologists trace pandemics, predict future routes of diffusion, and mobilise inoculation campaigns. In this context, GIS technology has transformed the utility of the “medical map”: when current information is crucial, it can be in hand in minutes and decisions be made with far greater confidence. (de Blij, 2012 p. 61)

Following on (somewhat inevitably) with the epidemiological thread, little did we know at that time in the spring of 2019 after the conference how things were about to change on a truly global scale barely 10 months later. Teaching a group of post-­ graduate student teachers in February 2020, one of the editors shared a first look at the now infamous John Hopkins Coronavirus Map https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map. html with its one red dot displayed over Wuhan, China. In this epoch-making time of a largely unforeseen global pandemic, socio-economic uncertainty and as we tread deeper into the Anthropocene, equipping young people with a strong, evidence-­ based and dynamic geography education has never seemed more needed. Holding a unique status as a subject that bridges the social and natural sciences, how geographical knowledge is recontextualised in schools is more significant than ever.

1.2  Formulating a Response Principally then, the aim of this book is to respond to the question we posed at the beginning of this chapter, ‘Why Recontextualise Geography in Education? It does this in a number of ways. It considers the epistemic relationships between the school subject and the discipline, designing and evaluating the geography curriculum, the role of students in the transformation of knowledge in the classroom and selecting and transforming geographical content knowledge for the primary school curriculum. The authorship of the book is international. There is also an eclectic and healthy mix of established researchers and writers in their field and relatively new authors (some who have written their chapters based on their doctoral theses). Whilst this research is mainly small scale and cannot be argued to be generalizable it does provide valuable empirical examples of how geography can be recontextualised in geography education. We stress that as a result, this edited collection does not purport to give one unified view on the nature and challenges of recontextualising

4

M. Fargher et al.

geography in education – instead, in the true spirit of the Springer series – it gives space to a range of voices and perspectives from educationists, educators and teachers. The book is organised in two sections  – one on theorising recontextualising geography in education, the second on recontextualising geography in education in practice. Both sections are presented with a brief overview by one of the editors, which makes reference more directly to each of the chapters in that section. By organising the book into two sections, focusing initially on the theory of recontextualising before presenting examples of recontextualising in practice, we have sought to focus the debate and prompt discussion around the links between the academic discipline of geography and what is globally recognised as school geography. Rather than focus on the differences between these, the book presents the thoughts and ideas of a range of authors working across the globe in relation to why and how the academic discipline of geography should and can be recontextualised in the classroom.

1.3  Conclusion At a global level the contributors and editors bring together the most recent and advanced collection of discussion and research surrounding central issues on the ways in which geography knowledge is selected and transformed in schools. The book will be of interest to geography education researchers worldwide, including academics at university and teachers in schools, as well as professional geographers with an interest in education. We are very aware of the mutual pressures and limitations on geography education and research in geography education (Butt, 2019). This book is aimed at partially relieving these constraints for geographers, educationists, educators and teachers alike. Wherever it is taught to a high level of quality, geography can be the vehicle for young peoples’ intellectual engagement with the pressing issues of our time. The big ideas that underpin geography including place, space, interdependence, scale, environment and sustainability can be mediated by teachers to develop their students’ deeper understanding of the world and to make sense of their role within it. This volume makes a unique contribution towards geography teachers theorising the processes of recontextualisation of geographical knowledge and putting these ideas into pedagogical practice.

References Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (Vol. 5). Rowman & Littlefield. Brooks, C., Butt, G., & Fargher, M. (Eds.). (2017). The power of geographical thinking. Springer. Butt, G. (2019). Bridging the divide between school and university geography–‘mind the gap!’. In Handbook for teaching and learning in geography. Edward Elgar Publishing.

1 Introduction

5

De Blij, H. (2012). Why geography matters. More than ever. Oxford University Press. Firth, R. (2017). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis. Lambert, D. (2019). On the knotty question of ‘Recontextualising’geography. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(4), 257–261. Matthews, J.  A., & Herbert, D.  T. (2008). Geography: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.

Part I

Theorising Recontextualising Geography

Chapter 2

The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios: An Overview David Lambert, Tine Béneker, and Gabriel Bladh

2.1  Introduction To say that a high-quality geography education is ‘a right’ for all young people is to make a bold claim. However, if we agree that “education is above all a preparation for the future” (Lucas et al., 2013: 3) and that geographical knowledge has transformative potential on how we understand the earth and human relations with it, then it seems less than bold and more a statement of the obvious. It is the right of all young people to have the opportunities afforded by the capabilities offered through geographical knowledge (Bustin, 2019; Lambert et  al., 2015). What we wish to stress in this chapter is the transformative potential of geography in the context of contemporary existential challenges of the human epoch. But this potential, realised through the creation of high-quality school geography (what we call Future 3 geography, described later in the chapter) can only be realised by teachers who are able and willing to take responsibility for it. US educationist Jerome Bruner produced a short, hugely impactful book called The Process of Education (Bruner, 1960). It is a book about the importance of curriculum thinking. Amongst other things, such as stressing the importance of teachers grasping the ‘structure’ of the subjects they teach and of adequately ‘sequencing’ D. Lambert (*) UCL Institute of Education, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] T. Béneker Faculty of Geosciences, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] G. Bladh Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_2

9

10

D. Lambert et al.

the material, he stated something startling and inspiring. He argued that “schools may be wasting precious years by postponing the teaching of many important (topics) on the grounds that they are too difficult” (Bruner, 1963: 12). He then really nailed this point at the beginning of Chap. 3: We begin with the hypothesis that any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development. (Bruner, 1963: 33)

Just think of it. Quantum mechanics; DNA; evolution; climate crisis; impressionist art; Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet; the slave trade; unequal distributions of wealth and wellbeing: these ideas/phenomena can be taught truthfully to all the youngsters you might encounter, in any school, anywhere. It falls to teachers to rise to the substantial challenge of working out what Bruner’s words mean in the context of school geography, and how to do make ‘effective’ teaching happen. Those interested in open democratic societies must believe that imparting what Bruner called “general understanding” and the benefits of a “well-disciplined, well-stocked mind” (Bruner, 1963: 5) are perhaps the enduring, but not always realised, purposes of formal education. Flowing from this, geography educationists can recognise their task as helping young people to understand deeply aspects of place, space and environment, and to think cogently and relationally about the Earth as the home of humankind. It is this thinking that has underpinned the GeoCapabilities project (www.geocapabilities.org) which at the time of writing is in its third phase. What to teach and how to do this ‘effectively’ (in the Brunerian sense) are the questions GeoCapabilities focusses on – but only after due consideration of who we are teaching and why we think geographical knowledge is of significance to them. It is clear that if you hold such Brunerian beliefs, adopting what we might call a geocapabilities approach to school geography makes sense. Such an approach requires ‘Future 3’ curriculum thinking (Béneker, 2018; Lambert, 2018, 2019a, b) underpinned by a clear-headed notion of ‘powerful knowledge’, and well-prepared school teachers engaging fruitfully in the dialogic practice of curriculum making (Lambert & Biddulph, 2015; Mitchell, 2019). The GeoCapabilities project draws strongly from Anglo-American traditions of curriculum studies, where the curriculum making process could be understood as the dialectic meeting between curriculum and pedagogy. But the approach developed by the project has also been stimulated by the continental and north European traditions of subject didactics as seen in the application of the curriculum making model (cf Bladh, 2020). Here, the didactic triad (teacher, subject content and students) frames the relational character of the didactical choices that teachers have to enact in their practice. This is a central understanding for teachers in the Dutch or Swedish context doing “vakdidactische handelen” (subject didactic actions) or “ämnesdidaktiska val” (subject didactical choices) thinking through the basic didactical questions of why, what and how to teach. These questions return us to Bruner and what he called the process of education. In this chapter we do so via our engagement with powerful knowledge and Future 3, the key planks of the capabilities approach to school geography.

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

11

2.2  Revisiting Powerful Knowledge The term powerful knowledge needs to be used with care. It is unsettling to some (Roberts, 2014) but can also be abused and used inappropriately – like a badge to ‘validate’ any knowledge rich curriculum (including some based on highly detailed lesson plans that are nothing more than naïve attempts at cultural restoration and an exercise of control over teachers and children). As Lambert (2019a, b) recently reminded us, it is a matter of distinguishing between power done to someone in order the exert control over them (knowledge as control), and power as a capacity that can be grasped and developed by someone. This is the enabling power of knowledge. As Muller and Young write: Teachers are the crucial mediators of the transformative capacity of PK in their subjects. When they are successful, and the pupils learn successfully, the pupils become empowered in a range of ways: in the quality of their discernment and judgement; in their appreciation of the range and reach of the substantive and conceptual fields of the subject; and in their appreciation that the substantive detail they have learnt is only part of what the hinterland of the subject has to offer. They are able to make new connections, gain new insights, generate new ideas. That is why PK is at the heart of true schooling. (Muller & Young, 2019: 213)

It is possibly self-evident that students should be learning through the enacted curriculum, and in so doing acquire knowledge and create new meaning. However, ‘the acquisition of knowledge’ has been heavily critiqued by modish constructivist arguments in education, which frequently describe acquisition as a passive process, implying a simplistic model of learning. But in line with Firth (2017a), we do not assume a narrow conception of ‘acquisition’, as if minds were empty vessels simply to be filled with facts (which explains our note on ‘inferentialism’ later in this chapter). Knowledge acquisition occurs when the learner has active engagement with data of all kinds and is facilitated by being introduced to new ideas and ‘ways of seeing’. As we will show later, ‘common sense’ ideas and concepts are already present in any encounter with data, but geography lessons can provide fresh ideas that may ‘unsettle’ students’ existing everyday conceptions. It is these that help students to see the world in new ways (or, as the Geographical Association’s 2009 Manifesto stated, to ‘travel with a different view’). In his famous volte face, Michael Young (2008, 2009) has re-asserted the voice of knowledge within education, distinguishing powerful knowledge from his much earlier notion (Young, 1971) of ‘knowledge of the powerful’.1 Young’s recent work has thus stimulated a healthy debate on what constitutes powerful knowledge in subjects such as geography (Lambert, 2014, 2017; Maude, 2016; Yates, 2018). This 1  The ‘new’ sociology of education at the beginning of the 1970s in England introduced concepts such as ‘knowledge and control’. The school curriculum was organised, it was argued, to serve the interests of the elite and was alienating to the many. This was, and remains, an influential position against ‘traditional subjects’. However, Young now argues that although there may well be truth in this analysis, the fact remains that the knowledge derived from sciences, the arts and humanities is powerful knowledge, and it is the denial of access to such knowledge, such as through curricula based on generic skills or ‘learning to learn’ that entrenches educational disadvantage.

12

D. Lambert et al.

has formed part of a wider argument about the kinds of curriculum thinking that may support powerful knowledge and in particular Future 3 thinking outlined below (Young & Lambert, 2014). Geography educationists have taken up Young’s ideas of powerful knowledge and curriculum futures with a high level of professional interest (Bustin, 2019; Vernon, 2016, 2019; Maude, 2016; Lambert & Solem, 2017) and frequently critically (e.g. Roberts, 2014; Slater et  al., 2016; Huckle, 2019). Furthermore, this interest has been international in scope (e.g. Tani et  al., 2018; Béneker & Palings, 2017; Bouwmans & Béneker, 2018; Virranmäki et al., 2019). Young has been keen to stress the different functions of knowledge between the academic discipline and the school subject. The discipline is at the forefront of advancing knowledge and takes students and researchers to the ‘coal-face’ discovering “new approaches and new areas of research” (Maude, 2016: 72). However, in school the role insofar as knowledge is concerned is more on the communication of knowledge (Lambert, 2014). Teachers need to find ways to engage young minds with knowledge that is real but is at the same time frequently counter-intuitive, abstract and theoretical – and therefore, for many students, difficult to acquire. This understanding of knowledge as being powerful gives rise to certain characteristics: for example, that it is reliable but also contestable and dynamic (as opposed to ‘given’ and inert). In addition, for Maude (2016), drawing from Young’s various writings, powerful knowledge is not just an end in itself. It is powerful because of what the knowledge also enables students to do. It is of course this enabling power of knowledge that links this concern with knowledge inputs of geography teaching to the capabilities approach (see below) and to geography curriculum making. As noted above, there has been critical debate about how concerns over powerful knowledge (the question of what to teach) relate to the classroom. Margaret Roberts crucially highlights that “knowledge is only potentially powerful” (2014: 205, our emphasis) and reminds us that powerful pedagogies are needed in order for students to unlock powerful knowledge. This observation, which draws from the learning theories derived from Vygotsky (see Derry, 2013), provides a helpful theoretical perspective on a number of key distinctions that Michael Young himself has tried to make, not least the key differences between what he calls Future 1 and a Future 3 curriculum scenarios. Both scenarios are ‘knowledge-led’ (unlike Future 2 which, as we see below, is oriented around generic learning outcomes), but while Future 1 can be summarised as a curriculum of transmission, Future 3 aspires to be a curriculum of engagement as we see later. Much of the debate on powerful knowledge could be interpreted as a consequence of the Anglo-American institutional (and thematic) split between curriculum and pedagogy – between the what and the how. In contrast, in the European didactical tradition the relations between the teacher, subject content and students are in focus, bringing together relations between the what, the why and the how. In his work on categorial Bildung the German educationalist Klafki identified this ideal, by relating material Bildung-theories (objective knowledge-focused content; Bildungsinhalt) with formal Bildung-theories (student-­ focused content; Bildungsgehalt). Categorial Bildung represents the objective and subjective side of Bildung, dialectically in combination (Meyer & Meyer, 2007; Willbergh, 2016). Metaphorically, one can understand the process as a double

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

13

opening: the pupil opening up to the world, and the world opening up to the pupil. When teachers make their didactical choices in their ‘curriculum thinking’ the educational potential of the content (seen as exemplary, contemporary and of future significance for the learner) is an important principle of selection (Bladh et  al., 2018). Coming back to powerful knowledge, Maude (2016) in fact discussed two ways of explaining the concept: one focussing on the characteristics that make knowledge powerful and the other on the power this knowledge gives those who possess it. In a Future 3 perspective the ‘the objective’ and ‘the subjective” sides of powerful knowledge are in line with Klafki and can be understood as dialectically combined. This also implies a dialectic meeting between ‘curriculum’ and ‘pedagogy’, which is a key insight in the Anglo-American perspective of curriculum enactment or curriculum making.

2.3  Future 3 Curriculum Thinking The ‘three futures’ heuristic enables us to tackle a fundamental tension: that although teachers have a crucial part to play in selecting what and how to teach, it is the learning that the pupils do that is the key. All teachers ‘know’ this, however. So how does the three futures heuristic take us forward? To begin with it is crucial to appreciate the role that the ‘learnification’ (Biesta, 2017a, b) of education appears to have played in shaping Young and Muller’s (2010) Future 2 scenario (although they did not use Biesta’s term). ‘Learning’ has become and still is a signature motif of much progressive educational thought. Learnification takes place when learning replaces teaching as the priority: teachers become supplicant to learners – formerly known as ‘students’ or ‘pupils’. Under the influence of learnification it is claimed that generic twenty-first century learning skills need to be developed by young people as these are replicable whatever the content. Indeed, content becomes merely the vehicle for learning (and arbitrary) rather than the object of study. Thus, Future 2 undermines teaching because teachers are encouraged to see themselves (merely) as facilitators of learning, responding to perceived ‘student need’, rather than teachers needing to respond to the challenge of selecting, shaping and finding a way to teach specific, worthwhile subject content. In this sense, Future 2 encourages an over technical concept of education which eschews teachers’ values other than those of technical efficiency and measurable ‘effectiveness’. Those who express reservations about Future 2 scenarios argue that educationally the most important element of learning is the quality of the content. The question of what should be taught, what we intend the students actually to learn (and how this is justified), is the quintessential ‘curriculum question’, and it calls for moral judgement. Future 2 seems to eschew moral questions, for learning is simply considered to be a good in itself. In this sense Future 2 scenarios are seriously deficient, even though they are well intended in their response to the inadequacies of ‘traditional’ knowledge-led curricula. Such Future 1 scenarios treat knowledge as

14

D. Lambert et al.

fixed in that it is pre-defined and ‘delivered’ to pupils as an uncontested, authoritative selection of what they need to know. It is thus elitist, and deeply disrespectful of students as subjects (Biesta, 2017a, b) who have histories and circumstances that teachers need to comprehend (if they are to teach them anything). In Future 1 scenarios the ‘warrant’ of the knowledge (how do we know what we claim to know?) is not really a concern, for the knowledge is ‘given’ and the teacher is the surrogate authority. This is therefore a grossly under-socialised curriculum. It can be interpreted as a legacy curriculum, stratified with an elite focus albeit with some trickle down to the masses (Young & Muller, 2010). On these grounds alone, it can be rejected as it solidifies social inequality (as predicted by another Michael Young in 1958, in the Rise of the Meritocracy). Future 1 is also inadequate in the contemporary context of existential challenges associated with the human epoch, in which an awareness of the quality of knowledge or claims to knowledge are crucial. It has arguably never been so important to be able to distinguish ‘better knowledge’ from unfounded opinion, ‘alternative facts’ and downright lies. Though rarely expressed in quite such a straightforward manner, this realisation doubtless explains widespread interest around the world in how to nurture generic ‘critical thinking’ in schools. But we have to think about something, and that object of thought can influence the way we think. It is this view of disciplinary knowledge, enabling thinking in new ways, that led Basil Bernstein to make his oft-quoted statement that disciplinary thought provides the circumstances for people ‘to think the unthinkable and the not yet thought’ (Bernstein, 2000: 30). If we imagine the first two curriculum scenarios (Future 1 and Future 2) sitting on either side of a knowledge-led versus learner-led spectrum, is Future 3 some kind of compromise, or best of both worlds? In a manner yes, but only very superficially so. The Future 3 scenario is an alternative that is knowledge-led, being underpinned by powerful knowledge. For school geography it promises a hopeful, but challenging future curriculum of engagement: that is, engagement not with ‘learning activities’ per se, but with the world of ideas: the ideas (ultimately expressed as the curriculum ‘content’) come first. Thus, Future 3 curriculum thinking requires us to at least address the matter of re-contextualisation between discipline and school subject. Whilst in Future 2 scenarios concerns about the nature of the relationship that may exist between school geography and the ‘ill-disciplined’ discipline of geography can simply be set aside, Future 3 demands more. As many have argued before (e.g. Jackson, 2006; Lambert, 2017; Morgan, 2017), teachers need to grasp what it means to think geographically about phenomena in the world. In short, the implication of a Future 3 ideal is that it requires geography teachers to take responsibility for the epistemic quality of the curriculum as experienced by the students (Lambert, 2017). The GeoCapabilities project has developed an approach to curriculum making that identifies processes of curriculum leadership that enable this professional responsibility.

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

15

2.4  The Capabilities Approach The GeoCapabilities project (www.geocapabilities.org) has become a significant context in which several of the ideas presented in the previous sections have been developed. Since 2009, the capabilities approach, derived from Amartya Sen (1995, 1999) and Martha Nussbaum’s (Nussbaum & Sen, 1993) ground breaking work in welfare economics and the humanities, has been developed as a way to ‘frame’ curriculum thinking in geography (Bustin, 2019; Lambert, 2009, 2011, 2017, 2018; Lambert & Morgan, 2010; Lambert et al., 2015; Uhlenwinkel et al., 2017). One of the attractions of Sen’s conception is that he steadfastly refused to specify individual ‘capabilities’ – as if they were like measurable competences. Although Nussbaum took a different view, and listed a number of human capabilities (Nussbaum, 2013), it is Sen’s approach that appeals as a means to articulate education in terms of its role in realising human potential – enhancing the freedom of people ‘to be and ‘to do’. The project attempts to show that human beings are more free when they are empowered to think in specialised ways – including when they can think geographically; that is, to analyse, explain and imagine with geographical knowledge and perspectives. In short, the capabilities approach provides a progressive way to link the contents of geography with the notion of educational aims and purposes which hold the development of human agency as a core value. The project goes as far as to claim that without high quality geography as a component of young people’s general education, their potential to think about themselves in the world, and about the changing relationship human beings have with the Earth (especially in the human epoch, or as Friedman (2016) describes it, the ‘age of accelerations’), is impaired. In this way, a lack of geography in school could be considered to be a form of capabilities deprivation  - quite a claim, and of course it depends very heavily on the quality of what is taught and learned in geography lessons. The GeoCapabilities project encourages knowledge-led professionalism through articulating teachers as ‘curriculum leaders’. What this means is that teachers take responsibility for enacting the curriculum (Biddulph, 2018). This is to say that a key component of teachers’ professionalism is their identity as specialist knowledge workers, working to develop powerful disciplinary knowledge in what they teach. Adopting a capabilities approach affords the possibility of working with specialist knowledge in a way that embraces broad educational goals, and in this way the capabilities approach helps teachers to operationalize Future 3 curriculum thinking. In this sense, curriculum making lies at the heart of teachers’ professional identity (Brooks, 2016: 45–7). Although there are day-to-day challenges and pressures on teachers that can make the ‘added’ responsibility of curriculum making seem insurmountable, in our view teachers need to claim this expert territory. Teachers of geography who are convinced of the power of geography and its educational potential can use the capabilities approach as principled professional platform, and embrace Future 3 thinking as the means to provide a high-quality geography education for all.

16

D. Lambert et al.

2.5  A Note About Inferential ‘Knowhow’ GeoCapabilities promotes Future 3 curriculum scenarios. Future 3 is underpinned by geography understood as powerful knowledge. Powerful knowledge resides in the quality of the teaching and learning – requiring sure-footed curriculum making by teachers, to ensure that the curriculum intent (to impart powerful knowledge) is successfully enacted. Part of the challenge in enacting a high-quality Future 3 curriculum is the lack of clarity of what exactly we mean by powerful knowledge: for no matter how convincing the principle, or vision, underpinning the intention of Future 3 thinking, the practice may yet seem elusive. Attempts by for example Alaric Maude (2016), who developed a typology to unpack and to specify geography as powerful knowledge, have been helpful. In this chapter we wish to highlight a particularly useful insight arising from Winch’s (2013) discussion of curriculum design and epistemic ascent. This is the role he ascribes to ‘inferential knowhow’ – and the possibility to teach young people in a manner that develops their ‘ability to know how to make appropriate inferences within a body of knowledge’ (Winch, 2013: 128). Inferentialism originates from philosopher Robert Brandom from his work on the ‘human knower’ (Brandom, 2000; see also Backhurst, 2011). It reveals the process by which human beings develop meaning though thinking and making connections through a series of inferential networks (Firth, 2017b). The classic comparison between humans and parrots illustrates the point: a parrot says ‘red’ when shown something of that colour because it trained to do so, but the human says red because they know it is not blue, or brown or yellow (etc). Another example shows the human inferential response to the occurrence of fire in an enclosed space. A machine, such as a fire alarm, senses heat or smoke sounds an alarm and people can escape; the human, however, on sensing flames, heat or smoke is able to infer the implications of the fire and shouts the alarm in order to prevent harm. The human reaction is based on reason. It follows that the more knowledge and experience the human can draw from the more effective this reasoning may become. Future 1 geography curriculum scenarios rely heavily on representationalism – the antithesis of inferentialism. Information is presented to the student not in a space of reasons but as discreet entity to be learned. – frequently in the form of definitions or representations such as diagrams or models. We could say that this a form of teaching to the test, conveyed by a representation of knowledge that pupils will need by “establishing definitions of terms” (Firth, 2017b: 86). Inferentialism, on the other hand, has an “emphasis on reasoning and conceptual understanding” (ibid). The knower can then contextualise their response, based on experiences, in a network of reasons. This enables the knower to ‘know why’ and respond “to reasons rather than simply to causes” (ibid: 87). It is important that students are given “both the conceptual space and time to grapple with the meaning of concepts, and they need to understand the relational nature of concepts through reasoning” (88). Recalling Margaret Robert’s (2014) observation that “knowledge is only potentially powerful” (205), inferentialism provides a useful perspective to unlocking the

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

17

potential of powerful knowledge and the creation of Future 3 curriculum scenarios. An inferential pedagogic approach enables students to step into a space of reasoning, where they can challenge, question, and interact with the knowledge presented to them. Their capacity to do so would increase throughout their education, as experience and the exposure to – and engagement with – geographical knowledge grows, enabling epistemic ascent. One of the strengths of Maude’s typology of geographical knowledge (Maude, 2016) is that taken as a whole it is highly suggestive of how inferential knowhow can be encouraged: it requires knowledge that is both extensive (descriptive world knowledge, including factual knowledge that is two miles wide and two inches deep) and intensive, conceptual knowledge that is often abstract and hard won.

2.6  To the Challenge of Recontextualisation The concept recontextualisation is derived from Basil Bernstein (2000), part of his so-called pedagogic device – the complicated process by which specialised knowledge production (typically conducted in research-oriented universities) informs and influences the business of making and communicating selections of knowledge to generations of learners, the primary task that falls to schools. Recent doctoral research (Kitson, forthcoming) has explored the degree to which teachers can and do play a contributory role as recontextualising agents (as Bruner implied they should). In her research Kitson studied teachers of physics, history and geography and a fascinating finding was that the model of recontextualisation appeared to be least convincing in the case of geography. This she surmised might be to do with the breadth of geography (or in Bernsteinian terms, its ‘horizontality’ compared to the more ‘vertical’ structure of physics) and ‘hybrid’ nature of geography: indeed, the physical geographer Nick Clifford (2018) has recently raised the question of whether geography can really be thought of as a discipline at all. And let us not forget that geography in schools predated the establishment of university departments of geography (in the UK) by many decades. In other words, geography also has a prominent place in the popular imaginary, possibly shaping what gets taught in schools as much as research outputs in the universities. In the case of geography then, recontextualisation is a particularly tricky idea and should be treated with caution. Nevertheless, teaching with intellectual honesty does require us to engage in some way with the untidy and unruly ‘discipline’ of geography to help us imagine a ‘school subject’ that can truly contribute to the process of education. This includes embracing as a virtue the dynamic and evolving nature of the discipline: for example, taking on what modern geography can tell us about masculinist and racist knowledges of the world; assimilating what is significant about global process in our apprehension of national boundaries and the emergence of (and limits of) nativist rhetoric and national exceptionalism; contemporary issues of global governance; understanding the diverse, local human impacts around the world of the climate emergency. This little list of course does not tell a teacher

18

D. Lambert et al.

what to teach. But it may help specialist teachers shape the geography curriculum in a way that is fit for the epochal challenges of the times. In his deep and wide account of the all-pervasive economic, political and environmental settings in which schools (mainly in the UK context) undertake their work, John Morgan (2019) recently asked ‘What’s left for education? It is easy to feel impotent and perhaps cynical about the optimism that fuelled Bruner’s ambitious vision of curriculum, the idea at the heart of the process of education. And in truth, Morgan is understandably unable to come up with a definitive answer to his question. But he is clear that knowledge matters. What we teach children – and why we make the selections we do  – is an important matter not to be treated lightly. Being interested in powerful knowledge is not just a matter of teaching effectively or efficiently. It is primarily concerned with the quality of what is being taught and for what purpose. It is about building teachers’ confidence as curriculum makers, building society’s trust in teachers’ role to impart a good general education to all young people. However, to paraphrase Walter Parker’s words, (2011, 2017) teachers will need to swim upstream against a multitude of systemic downstream currents of policy and organisational accountability procedures, standards and norms. Instead of ambition, imagination, understanding and joy in teaching, we have instead to battle with the stifling, heavy hand of norms, competence and compliance. But even in national education systems where the testing culture underscores a neoliberal faith in the benefits of choice and competition, we still need to extoll the virtues of “hard curriculum thinking” (Spielman, 2018) and focus on the ‘quality of education’ not pupil outcomes and crude metrics.

2.7  School Geography as a Dynamic Entity In a straightforward sense, geography taught in schools enables pupils “to learn about, and reflect on, aspects of the world” (Lambert & Morgan, 2010: 4). This requires, in part, the recontextualisation of knowledge created in the universities (Firth, 2017a) into a form that is appropriate educationally. At the very least this requires a tricky selection process, and the resulting products of recontextualisation are formalised in documents such as examination specifications and textbooks. These documents also need working with and interpreting by teachers, and so contextualisation also results in departmental schemes of work and lesson plans and bespoke learning materials. At each stage of recontextualisation a transformation of geographical knowledge takes place and of course, the transformation process is still not complete without fully understanding the classroom itself as a dynamic space - for example, full of young people who bring their own perceptions, attitudes and ‘prior learning’ to the enactment of the planned curriculum. Thus, recontextualisation process is a multi-level process of enormous complexity. To understand this more completely a substantial research network is required that is able to stretch

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

19

Three Futures Heuristic F1 scenario: the “traditional” school model, a given and inert selection of “delivered” knowledge-as-fact, an under- socialised view of knowledge risks becoming rigid and unresponsive. F1 scenarios are unsuitable for contemporary high-quality education. F2 scenario: a “progressive” reaction to F1, typically generic and considers curriculum content to be arbitrary and flexible. This over-socialised model risks becoming “knowledge blind”, ignoring the domain-specific character of learning. F3 scenario: the visioning of a high quality, productive knowledge-rich school curriculum thinking based upon conceptions of ‘powerful knowledge’ (PK). One challenge is how to make the epistemic quality of PK accessible for all young people.

Fig. 2.1  The Three Futures heuristic. (Adapted from Young & Muller, 2010)

across this complexity. The EPoCH proposal2 submitted to the EU in January 2020 was devised by the authors and others precisely to address such a challenge, and we briefly describe this below (see Fig. 2.2). But we should acknowledge that school geography is also inextricably linked to wider movements within society: the subject is to an extent a “reflection of the culture of society” (Lambert & Morgan, 2010: 4; Morgan, 2019). This creates a tension between ‘pure’ academic geography on the one hand, and broader, educational perspectives on geography. The collective challenge facing the formal and informal elements of the recontextualisation process (e.g. from syllabus writers and textbooks authors to individual classroom teachers), is as Marsden observed many years ago, to strike a suitable balance between social purposes, educational processes, and the subject contents (Marsden, 1997). The specialist geography teacher plays has a crucial part in this process even though it is vital to acknowledge that there are other players and layers in the total process as Fig. 2.1 shows. But the responsibility that falls to specialist and non-specialist teachers alike in mediating the relationship between the subject and discipline, as well as that between the subject contents and students, is real and apparent. The framework shown in Fig.  2.2 was created by the authors (and others) to house the overriding research question of the EPoCH proposal, which was developed in order to create a sufficiently large research network to study the recontextualisation process. EPoCH tackles this through the collaboration of five European and one South African university (plus 16 partners involving the world’s largest educational publisher, the leading provider of geographical information services, schools, NGOs and learned societies). This unprecedented programme will create an innovative international training network of scholars and early stage researchers, who share a commitment to the visioning, design, implementation and enactment of a high-quality, knowledge-rich curriculum  – which we take as synonymous with Future 3 curriculum scenarios. Furthermore, a diverse set of research projects will 2  ‘Engagement with Knowledge Power in Schools and the Development of Capabilities for the Human Epoch’ (EPoCH). A proposal for an Innovative Training Network, submitted January 2020 (Innovative Training Networks (ITN) Call: H2020-MSCA-ITN-2020).

20

D. Lambert et al.

Fig. 2.2  The Transformation of knowledge for educational purposes. (Source: Based on The Anthropological Theory of Didactic (ATD) Chevallard, Y., & Bosch, M. (2013). Adapted by the authors as the ‘EPoCH framework’)

not only engage with future curriculum scenarios ‘fit for the twenty-first century’ but develop an educational response to the existential challenges of the ‘human epoch’ (notably, but not only, the climate emergency). They achieve this through focus on the development of students’ capabilities: that is, enhancing their capacity to engage with knowledge cognitively, creatively and in making imaginative connections as well as worthwhile distinctions between the contents of specialist school subjects. The overarching research question is therefore of enormous scope: How can Future 3 curricula be envisioned, developed and enacted in practice? Thus, EPoCH is organized around re-imagining school teaching in F3 curriculum scenarios (with a focus on history as well as geography). This implies a multi-level perspective where different parts of the educational system will be of interest, from policy level to the classroom. All twelve projects in the EPoCH programme therefore work with the F3 ‘vision’, but they do so in a manner that is inherently inter-disciplinary and which explores the ‘connective specialism’ of history and geography – the perspective that calls for a “… curriculum that treats the relations between subjects as being as important as the subject contents themselves” (Young, 1998: 132). As with the GeoCapabilities projects, the social realist approach underpinning the EPoCH initiative in curriculum studies (forming the basis of the F3 ‘vision’) opens up new possible relations with the continental Didaktik research traditions that may prove to be enormously productive. In the realisation of a Future 3 curriculum scenario we believe it is vitally important that teachers understand the role of geography as powerful knowledge in order to achieve the kind of recontextualization of geography for a high-quality teaching and learning to take place.

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

21

2.8  Conclusion The EPoCH project may or may not happen. If it does, then a dozen related doctoral research projects will be undertaken across Europe and South Africa, all working with the enormous potential of Future 3 thinking - and the enhancement in the quality of geography education that ought to follow. If it does not, then the prospect still remains, though progress towards clarifying and enacting Future 3 will be slower. Much slower. Either way, perhaps the key element in realising the potential of Future 3 is the geography teacher. They are the crucial component in the recontextualization of geography, understood as an idea fit for a twenty-first century educational context, and the purveyor of certain kinds of powerful knowledge. They do not do this work in isolation and, as we have noted, often have to ‘swim upstream’ against the flow of competing and often contradictory priorities. But it is the teacher, ideally working within local, regional, national and international supportive communities, who is the custodian of those two sprawling, powerful ideas: geography and education. In terms of the educated young person, a lot depends on how effectively these ideas are made to interact by the teacher who is the key agent in what Bruner called the process of education.

References Backhurst, D. (2011). The formation of reason. Wiley-Blackwell. Béneker, T. (2018). Powerful knowledge in geographical education. Inaugural lecture as professor of Geography and Education, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University (16.10.2018). Béneker, T., & Palings, H. (2017). Student teachers’ ideas on (powerful) knowledge in geography education. Geography, 102(2), 77–85. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Rowman and Littlefield. Biddulph, M. (2018). Chapter 11: Curriculum enactment. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Routledge. Biesta, G. (2017a). Education, measurement and the professions: Reclaiming a space for democratic professionality in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(4), 315–330. Biesta, G. (2017b). The rediscovery of teaching. Routledge. Bladh, G. (2020) Geocapabilities, didactical analysis and curriculum thinking  – Further the dialogue between Didaktik and Curriculum. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 29(4) (special issue on GeoCapabilities). Bladh, G., Stolare, M., & Kristiansson, M. (2018). Curriculum principles, didactic practice and social issues: Thinking through teachers’ knowledge practices in collaborative work. London Review of Education, 16(3), 398–413. Bouwmans, M., & Béneker, T. (2018). Identifying powerful geographical knowledge in integrated curricula in Dutch schools. London Review of Education, 16(3), 445–459. Brandom, R. (2000). Articulating reasons: An introduction to inferentialism. Harvard University Press. Brooks, C. (2016). Teacher subject identity in professional practice: Teaching with a professional compass. Routledge. Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.

22

D. Lambert et al.

Bruner, J. (1963). The process of education (Vintage Edition). Vintage Books/Random House. Bustin, R. (2019). Geography education’s potential and the capability approach: Geocapabilities and schools. Palgrave Macmillan. Chevallard, Y., & Bosch, M. (2013). Didactic transposition in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education: SpringerReference (www.springerreference.com). Springer. Clifford, N. (2018). Geography’s identity as an academic discipline. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. p250–p262). Routledge. Derry, J. (2013). Vygotsky: Philosophy and education. Wiley-Blackwell. Firth, R. (2017a). Chapter 20: Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Routledge. Firth, R. (2017b). What might inferentialism’s view of the human knower have to offer geography education? Geography, 102(2), 86–90. Friedman, T. (2016). Thank you for being late: An optimist’s guide to thriving in the age of acceleration. Penguin books. Huckle, J. (2019). Powerful knowledge is critical knowledge underpinned by critical realism. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(1), 70–84. Jackson, P. (2006). Thinking geographically. Geography, 91(3), 199–204. Kitson, A. (forthcoming). Teachers as recontextualization agents: A study of teachers’ knowledge and their role in the recontextualization process across different subjects. Thesis presented for PhD examination: UCL Institute of Education, 2020. Lambert, D. (2009). Geography in education: Lost in the post? (Professorial inaugural lecture). Institute of Education. Lambert, D. (2011). Reframing school geography: A capabilities approach. In G.  Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future. Continuum. Lambert, D. (2014). Chapter 7: Subject teachers in knowledge-led schools. In M.  Young, D. Lambert, C. Roberts, & M. Roberts (Eds.), Knowledge and the future school: Curriculum and social justice (pp. 159–187). Bloomsbury Academic. Lambert, D. (2017). Thinking geographically. In M. Jones (Ed.), The handbook of secondary geography. Sheffield. Lambert, D. (2018). The road to future 3: The case of geography. In D.  Guile, D.  Lambert, & M. Reiss (Eds.), Sociology, curriculum studies and professional knowledge: New perspectives on the work of Michael Young (pp. 132–145). Routledge. Lambert, D. (2019a). Geography, capabilities and the educated person. In E. Shin & S. Bednarz (Eds.), Spatial citizenship education: Citizenship through geography. Routledge. Lambert, D. (2019b). On the knotty question of ‘recontextualising’ geography. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(4), 257–261. Lambert, D., & Biddulph, M. (2015). The dialogic space offered by curriculum-making in the process of learning to teach, and the creation of a progressive knowledge-led curriculum. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 210–224. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2010). Teaching geography 11–18 a conceptual approach. OUP. Lambert, D., & Solem, M. (2017). Rediscovering the teaching of geography. Geographical Education, 30, 8–15. Lambert, D., Solem, M., & Tani, S. (2015). Achieving human potential through geography education: A capabilities approach to curriculum making in schools. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(4), 723–735. Lucas, B., Claxton, G., & Spencer, E. (2013). Expansive education: Teaching learners for the real world. ACER. Marsden, B. (1997). On taking the geography out of geographical education  – Some historical pointers in geography. Geography, 82((356), Part 3), 241–252. Maude, A. (2016). What might powerful geographical knowledge look like? Geography, 101(Part 1), 70–76. Meyer, M., & Meyer, H. (2007). Wolfgang Klafki. Eine Didaktik fur das 21. Jahrhundert? Belitz.

2  The Challenge of ‘Recontextualisation’ and Future 3 Curriculum Scenarios…

23

Mitchell, D. (2019). Hypersocialised: How teachers enact the geography curriculum in late capitalism. Routledge. Morgan, J. (2017). Chapter 21: Are we thinking geographically? In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Routledge. Morgan, J. (2019). Culture and the political economy of schooling: What’s left for education? Routledge. Muller, & Young. (2019). Knowledge, power and powerful knowledge re-visited. The Curriculum Journal, 30(2), 196–214. Nussbaum, M. (2013). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press. Nussbaum, M., & Sen, A. (1993). The quality of life. Oxford University Press. Parker, W. C. (2011). Constructing public schooling today: Derision, multiculturalism, nationalism. Educational Theory, 61(4), 413–432. Parker, W. C. (2017). Towards a powerful human rights curriculum in schools: Problems and possibilities. In J.  A. Banks (Ed.), Citizenship education and global migration: Implication for theory, research and teaching (pp. 457–482). American Educational Research Association. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 187–209. Sen, A. (1995). Inequality reexamined. Oxford University Press. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. Slater, S., Graves, N., & Lambert, D. (2016). Editorial. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 25(3), 189–194. Spielman, A. (2018). Speech reported 10.10.18. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-­news/ofsted-­exam-­results-­school-­inspections-­watchdog-­amanda-­spielman-­ curriculum-­a8578761.html Tani, S., Cantell, H., & Hilander, M. (2018). Powerful disciplinary knowledge and the status of geography in Finnish upper secondary schools: Teachers’ views on recent changes. J-Reading-­ Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography, 1. http://www.j-­reading.org/index.php/ geography Uhlenwinkel, A., Béneker, T., Bladh, G., Tani, S., & Lambert, D. (2017). GeoCapabilities and curriculum leadership: Balancing the priorities of aims-based and knowledge-led curriculum thinking in schools. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 26(4), 327–341. Vernon, E. (2016). The structure of knowledge: Does theory matter? Geography, 101(2), 100–104. Vernon, E. (2019). Teaching to the epistemic self: Ascending and descending the ladder of knowledge. The Curriculum Journal, 31(1), 27–47. Virranmäki, E., Valta-Hulkkonen, K., & Rusanen, J. (2019). Powerful knowledge and the significance of teaching geography for in-service upper secondary teachers – A case study from Northern Finland. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(2), 103–117. Winch, C. (2013). Curriculum design and epistemic ascent. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(1), 128–146. Willbergh, I. (2016). Bringing teaching back in: The Norwegian NOU the school of the future in light of the Allgemeine Didaktik theory of Wolfgang Klafki. Nordic Journal of Pedagogy & Critique, 2016(2), 111–124. Yates, L. (2018). History and Knowledge: Humanities challenges for a knowledge-based curriculum. In B. Barrett, U. Hoadley, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Knowledge, curriculum and equity: Social realist perspectives. Routledge. Young, M. (1958). The rise of the meritocracy 1870–2033: An essay on education and society. Thames and Hudson. Young, M. (1971). Knowledge and Control: New directions for the sociology of education. Collier-Macmillan.

24

D. Lambert et al.

Young, M. (1998). The curriculum of the future: From the ‘new sociology of education’ to a critical theory of learning (p. 132). Falmer Press. Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Routledge. Young, M. (2009). Education, globalisation and the ‘voice of knowledge’. Journal of Education and Work, 22(3), 193–204. Young, M., & Muller, J. (2010). Three education scenarios for the future: Lessons from the sociology of knowledge. European Journal of Education, 45((1), Part 1). Young, M., & Lambert, D. (2014). Knowledge and the future school: Curriculum and social justice. Bloomsbury.

Chapter 3

Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’ Alaric Maude

3.1  Introduction Recontextualisation is about the ways in which knowledge is selected from the fields in which it is produced, and transformed into school curricula, students’ textbooks and teachers’ lessons (Bernstein, 2003; Firth, 2017). In the case of geography this knowledge is mostly produced in universities, but as only some of it is appropriate for schools, it must be selected, expressed in ways that can be comprehended by young learners, and sequenced through the school years. Basil Bernstein’s writings on recontextualisation dominate the literature on this topic.1 He provides many stimulating ideas about the process of recontextualisation and the different agents involved in it, but he does not provide much, if any, help on how to recontextualise. This may be because he appears to see recontextualisation as a struggle between different ideologies and interest groups, rather than a process based on reasoned adaptations of academic knowledge. This chapter responds to this gap by examining two aspects of recontextualisation. As the theme of the London IGU CGE 2019 Conference was ‘how geography’s “big ideas” are recontextualised in schools’, the first aspect examined is how to select these ‘big ideas’, while the second is how to recontextualise them. The chapter also comments on two important issues raised by Bernstein—the structure of knowledge in social science and humanities subjects like geography, and the relationship between the school subject and the academic discipline—because both have an influence on recontextualisation.

 However, see Dowling (2014) for other theoretical frameworks on recontextualisation.

1

A. Maude (*) College of Humanities, Arts and the Social Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_3

25

26

A. Maude

3.2  Selecting Geography’s Key Concepts The invitation to the conference identified geography’s ‘big ideas’ as place, space, interdependence, scale, environment and sustainability. In this chapter I will use the term ‘key concept’ for these ‘big ideas’, and reserve the latter for another purpose. The six concepts are a selection from the academic field of geography, and are therefore an example of recontextualisation. However, they have been presented without any reasons for their choice and are therefore an opinion, even if a very well-informed one. Is there a way to select geography’s key concepts that is based on a reasoned argument, and is therefore more than an opinion? The process described below attempts to develop such a method, involving two steps. The first step is to ask what makes a concept a key concept? Eleanor Rawling pioneered thinking about geographical concepts in English-language education in her 2007 guide for teachers on Planning your Key Stage 3 geography curriculum. In this she wrote that the big key concepts in geography ‘… may be thought of as standing at the top of a hierarchy of ideas …,’ and ‘… are the most abstract and generalised …’ ideas (Rawling, 2007, pp. 23–24). In the literature on science education key concepts are termed ‘big ideas’ or ‘core principles’, and are described as follows: The nature of these [big ideas] differs from domain to domain, but in general they are abstract principles that can be used to organize broad areas of knowledge and make inferences in the domain, as well as determining strategies for solving a wide range of problems. (Niemi & Phelan, 2008, as quoted in Michael & McFarland, 2011, p. 337) By definition, big ideas are important and enduring. Big ideas are transferable beyond the scope of a particular unit . . . Big ideas are the building material of understanding. They can be thought of as the meaningful patterns that enable one to connect the dots of otherwise fragmented knowledge. (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, as quoted in Michael & McFarland, 2011, p. 337)

Building on these statements, I suggest that key concepts have the following characteristics: 1. They are at the top of a hierarchy of concepts of increasing complexity and abstractness. Concepts in geography range from descriptive ones such as suburb or precipitation, to more abstract ones such as urbanisation or climate, to very abstract ones such as place or space. Those at the very abstract end of this continuum can be thought of as ‘key’ because they synthesise and incorporate simpler and less abstract concepts, and cannot be subsumed by an even bigger and more abstract one. Clare Brooks describes such concepts as ‘hierarchical’ (Brooks, 2018, p. 105). 2. They can be applied to a great variety of topics, and across different fields of a subject, so are ‘key’ in that they are widely used and give the subject a degree of unity and coherence.

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

27

3. They have a number of functions, such as guiding the formulation of questions, suggesting methods of analysis, forming generalisations, and identifying possible explanations. The second step is to ask what geographical concepts qualify as key concepts on these criteria? In science the key concepts, or big ideas, have generally been selected by asking professional scientists in each discipline (Michael & McFarland, 2011; Michael et  al., 2008). An alternative followed here is to analyse the selections already made by practising geographers and geography educators. A review of academic articles on geographical concepts and geographical thinking, and of school curricula in several jurisdictions, shows that place, space, environment and some variant of interdependence/interaction/interconnection are almost always listed as key concepts in the discipline. Others proposed, but not quite as frequently, include processes, time or change, scale, systems, nature, landscape, region and sustainability.2 Which of the concepts identified above meet the criteria for a key concept? Place, space and environment do, as they are highly abstract ideas that sit at the top of a hierarchy of concepts (as will be discussed later), can be applied across the discipline, and have a number of functions. Interconnection, I suggest, also meets the criteria for a key concept, although it was not in the conference list of ‘big ideas’. It is a very abstract, high-level concept, and can be disaggregated into a number of more specific concepts or ideas. These include interdependence (which was on the conference list); spatial interaction (the effects of events and actions in one place on other places); processes (which are sequences of connected events3); flows (which connect places and influence their characteristics); and systems (which are sets of interconnected phenomena linked through flows of energy and matter and, where humans are involved, people and information). It can be applied across many fields of geography, both human and physical, and has a number of functions, such as being used to suggest questions (e.g. how are these phenomena connected?), organising information (e.g. as systems) and pointing to explanations (e.g. causal interconnections). Interconnection is also a fundamental part of thinking geographically, particularly in the way it encourages holistic rather than reductionist thinking, and supports geography’s claim to be an integrative discipline.

2  The sources for this list are Clifford et al., 2009; Gregory & Lewin, 2018; Hanson, 2004; Harvey, 2005; Jackson, 2006; Johnston & Sidaway, 2015; Lambert & Morgan, 2010; Maude, 2013. 3  Process is a term that is often used very loosely, but here I take it to mean a sequence of connected events. An example is erosion and sedimentation, which combine to form a process in which weathered material is transported by water or wind and deposited in a new place through a sequence of connected events. Chain migration is another example, in which the initial movement of people to a new place may, through the flow of information back to the place of origin, encourage further migration. In this example the places are interconnected through flows of people and information. However, unlike physical processes, the migration of people is the result of human decisions, whereas physical processes are autonomous and self-regulating processes determined by physical, chemical and biological laws (Vayda et al., 1991).

28

A. Maude

The key concepts of place, space, environment and interconnection identified above are geography’s biggest ideas—ways of thinking about the world, prompts to the questions to ask about this world, guides to the conduct of an inquiry or investigation, and frameworks for analysis and explanation. They are also what gives the subject coherence, linking the different topics studied in school geography through shared concepts and the ways of thinking they produce. They are what makes geography ‘geographical’, and enable students to ‘distinguish what is distinctively different about learning geography from other school subject areas’ (Brooks, 2018, p.  106). Although they are also employed in other disciplines, such as ecology, archaeology, economics and sociology, in none of these are they as central to thinking and practice as in geography, and in none are they used as frequently in combination. Furthermore, as key concepts at the top of a hierarchy they group together and give some order to the many smaller concepts encountered in school geography. Space, for example, encompasses concepts such as absolute location, relative location, distance, proximity, remoteness, space-time compression, the production of space, spatial distribution, spatial concentration, spatial association, spatial inequalities, spatial segregation, spatial organisation, spatial analysis and the representation of space. This grouping gives students a complex understanding of spatial thinking and the role of space in human life. The remaining candidates for status as a key geographical concept are processes, time or change, scale, systems, landscape, region and sustainability. Several of these do not qualify as key because they are not at the top of a hierarchy of concepts. Processes and systems, as already noted, are subsidiary concepts under interconnection, region is a subsidiary concept of place (because it is a type of place), and nature and landscape are subsidiary concepts of environment. This leaves time or change, scale and sustainability. These are important concepts, but they differ from the four key ones in the limited range of their functions. Scale is largely an analytical concept, because it is mostly used in geography to analyse relationships by investigating them at different scales. Time is also an analytical concept, because it can be used to explain phenomena by understanding how they have developed or changed over time. Sustainability, on the other hand, is largely an evaluative concept, because it is mostly used to assess the implications of an environmental change, or the economic or demographic viability of a place. Human wellbeing could be added as another evaluative concept, because it can be used to assess the implications and significance of environmental, economic and social change for people. It also adds an essential ethical dimension to geography, and can be a topic for class debates. Sustainability and human wellbeing are of course closely connected, because wellbeing (and even survival) depends on a sustainable environment. Scale, time, sustainability and human wellbeing are therefore core or major concepts in geography, but do not meet the criteria for key concept status. Here they are called analytical or evaluative concepts. The selection and classification of geography’s major concepts described above is by no means definitive, and others may make different selections and create different classifications. What is important, however, is that any selection and classification of the major concepts should help students to understand the reasons for their selection, their functions, and the ways of thinking they support.

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

29

3.3  Recontextualising a Key Geographical Concept The key concepts of place, space, environment and interconnection are highly abstract single-word terms that have no clear conceptual meaning on their own. They can also be misleading, because the everyday meaning of words like place, space and environment are not the same as their conceptual meaning. For example, while places are parts of the Earth’s surface that have been defined, named and given meaning by people, the concept of place is about ways of thinking that are based on understanding places and their influence—it is about ideas, not objects. For use in schools these concepts therefore have to be carefully recontextualised to express these meanings in ways that students can understand and use. Advice on ways to do this can be found in the literature on ‘big ideas’ in science education. In this literature ‘big ideas’ are described as conceptual understandings or generalisations that integrate ideas and describe relationships derived from a wide variety of empirical case studies.4 Consequently they are expressed as sentences with verbs, not as topic headings or single words. They are educationally valuable because they help students to summarise a lot of information, and so increase their ability to retain it. They are even more valuable if they include explanation and can be used to predict. As generalisations they also enable students to transfer what they have learned from the study of one set of factual relationships to situations they have not encountered before, and to go beyond what they already know. Using this advice, the concept of place could be expressed as: The unique characteristics of each place influence the local outcomes of environmental and human processes, and the lives of the people who live in them.5

This statement combines a number of fundamental geographical ideas. One is that places are unique, and differ in some ways from each other. The second is that these unique characteristics interact with environmental and human processes to determine their local outcomes, while the third is that, because of their effects on people’s health, educational attainment, aspirations and economic opportunities, the characteristics of the places in which people live influence, but do not determine, their lives. To fully understand the statement, therefore, it is necessary to recognise that high-level concepts are ‘complex assemblages of interconnected smaller ideas’ (Michael, 2017, p. 37), and need to be disaggregated or unpacked for students to gain a clear idea of what each concept means, and how to use it. For English-­ language geography this conceptual unpacking was begun by Rawling (2007) and Lambert (2007), and later extended by them in a short list of ‘major overarching  Mainly based on Harlen (2010), and Mitchell et al. (2016). The literature on science education also reminds us that there are other important big ideas about the doing of geography relating to what should we study, how can we find out, what can we know, and how do we know it? Mostly they are widely shared with other disciplines. 5  For recontextualisations of the other key, analytical and evaluative concepts identified in this chapter see Appendix 1. The recontextualisations and generalisations in this chapter are by the author, and therefore not referenced. 4

30

A. Maude

generalisations that school geography can begin to build and develop with children and young people’ (Lambert, 2011, p. 262). Their work can be further developed into the following generalisations about the different ways geographers think about and use the concept of place: 1. Places are parts of the Earth’s surface that have been identified and given meaning by people, and may be perceived and used differently by people of different ages, gender, physical ability, ethnicity or other attributes. These meanings may be contested. 2. The characteristics of a place are influenced by its environment, resources, relative location, culture and economy; the decisions and actions of people, businesses, organisations and governments; and its economic, demographic, cultural and political interconnections with other places. 3. Places are the context in which things exist and actions happen, and their unique characteristics influence what exists and what happens. As a consequence, the outcomes of similar environmental and socioeconomic processes may be different in different places, people may respond differently to people in other places when faced with similar issues, and similar problems may require different strategies in different places. 4. Places provide people with the services and facilities needed to support and enhance their lives, but unequally between places and between people within places. 5. The places in which people grow up and live have an influence, but not a determining one, on their health, educational attainment, aspirations and economic opportunities. 6. For many people, attachment to a place or places is important for their identity and sense of belonging, but increasing mobility and the use of telecommunication technologies may be changing people’s relationships with places. 7. Places can be used as laboratories for the analysis of the interrelationships of environmental and human variables, and causal relationships can be investigated through a controlled comparison of places. These generalisations are derived from the academic literature about place, and are a distillation of a number of studies.6 They illustrate the richness of the concept, and the ways it can be disaggregated into meaningful statements. They are also generalisations that recognise some of the different philosophical approaches in geography, such as humanistic studies of perception and place attachment (statements 1 and 6), feminist studies of gender (statement 1), and Marxist studies of urban redevelopment (statement 2). However, the list is not definitive, as geographers will have different ideas on ‘place’, and these ideas will change over time. The aim here is to show how a key geographical concept can be unpacked, not necessarily how it should be unpacked.

6  Good reviews of the concept of place are in Adams (2017), Creswell (2015), Murphy (2018) and Staeheli (2003).

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

31

Milligan and Wood (2010) argue that generalisations such as those above should not be taught as endpoints, but as ideas for ‘further inquiry and critique’. They particularly point to the value judgements that are implicit in many geographical topics, and which may be hidden in the concepts and generalisations that are selected by teachers and students. This is where the concepts of sustainability and human wellbeing are especially valuable, for they draw attention to important social and ethical questions. For example, a study of future world food security might simply compare projections of future global population with estimates of potential world food output, and come to the conclusion that there will be enough food. On the other hand, if the concepts of sustainability and human wellbeing are applied, the conclusion might be that future world food security is threatened more by poverty, conflict, water scarcity, climate change and unsustainable agricultural methods than by the growth of population. Such a statement also involves the concepts of interconnection, because it identifies the multiple causes of food insecurity, and place and scale, because it recognizes that while at a global scale there may be sufficient food, at regional scales people in places with low incomes and/or conflict will be unable to obtain it. This illustrates the power of using geography’s major concepts in combination.

3.4  Disaggregating a Key Concept The seven generalisations about the concept of place in the previous section are second-level conceptual understandings, because they are one level below the top concept. However, they are still quite complex statements, because they synthesise a large amount of information and combine several smaller concepts. They are statements that students might comprehend later in their education, but for earlier use in schools they need to be further disaggregated. The following example of what this might look like is for another key geographical concept, that of space (Fig. 3.1). The structure of increasing conceptual abstraction shown in the figure builds upwards from the bottom, starting with substantive topics often found in the school geography curriculum. After studying these topics, students might produce or understand the generalisations on the next level, which are third-level understandings. These describe different aspects of the second-level understanding above them, which synthesises the concepts of relative location, distance, proximity, technology, human organisation, and social and economic structures into a high-level generalisation. This in turn is one dimension of the key concept of space at the top of the figure. This illustrates how the recontextualisation of a key concept can involve several levels of disaggregation. However, deep student understanding of the concept is best gained by generalising upwards from case studies or topics to broader and broader syntheses of geographical knowledge, as their knowledge of the subject grows through the school years, rather than by unpacking downwards with no factual knowledge of real world examples. As Erickson et al. (2017, p. 2)

32

A. Maude

The concept of space is about how the space that is the surface of the Earth is perceived, experienced, organised and represented by people; the effects of location in this space on geographical phenomena and the lives of people; and the significance of how phenomena are distributed across space.

Relative location, distance and proximity affect human activities and lives, but their influence depends on technology, human organisation, people’s individual characteristics, and social and economic structures.

Relative location affects businesses through access to suppliers, markets, infrastructure, labour and information, but unequally between different types of business.

Because of the advantages of proximity, economic activities tend to cluster in space, at all scales from the local to the global, unless tied to the location of natural resources or dispersed customers.

Topic on the location of economic activities

The constraints of distance for businesses and people are being reduced by transport and communication technologies, and the ways these are managed, but unequally between businesses, people and places.

Relative location affects individuals through access to services, social contacts, education and employment, but unequally between people of different age, gender, income, ethnicity, education, location and other characteristics.

Topic on transport and communication

Topic on social geography

Fig. 3.1  The structure of one dimension of concept of space

warn, ‘One cannot understand at the conceptual level without knowing the supporting facts and skills.’ Young agrees: Content, therefore, is important, not as facts to be memorised, as in the old curriculum, but because without it students cannot acquire concepts and, therefore, will not develop their understanding and progress in their learning. (Young, 2010, p. 25)

On the other hand, students do need to be aware of the general idea underlying each of the key concepts, so they may recognise examples of them in what they are studying.

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

33

3.5  The Structure of Geographical Knowledge The outcome of this disaggregation into several levels is a hierarchical structure of knowledge, but there are theoretical questions about whether geography can support such a structure. Bernstein (1999) argued that the sciences have a vertical knowledge structure, in which very general propositions and theories at the peak of a pyramid build on and integrate knowledge from lower levels. In biology, for example, evolution is a complex theory that integrates the different areas of the subject (Johnson et al., 2011). The social sciences and humanities, on the other hand, have a more horizontal structure, in which separate fields exist side-by-side and do not build upwards to increasingly more general and abstract ideas. Geography is usually regarded as having a horizontal structure, although this is complicated by the spread of the subject across the sciences, social sciences and humanities. The earlier example of the disaggregation of the concept of place into a number of second-level generalisations suggests another way of viewing the structure of knowledge in geography. The subject can be described as having a horizontal knowledge structure because of the variety of perspectives that have emerged over time, such as spatial analysis, and humanistic, feminist and Marxist geography, and the lack of high-level theory that can subsume them. On the other hand, all these perspectives contribute to a fuller understanding of the ways to understand and use the concept of place, and have made it a very powerful way of thinking. This can provide geography with a degree of coherence around concepts and ways of thinking, rather than around theories. Support for this argument comes from another of Bernstein’s ideas, the concept of ‘grammaticality’, which refers to the extent to which the research outcomes of the separate ‘languages’ or perspectives of a discipline can be tested against an empirical world, and confirmed or rejected (Muller, 2006). Most, but perhaps not all, of the different approaches to place in geography can be tested in this way, and demonstrate that they add something to the understanding of place. Another argument against a hierarchical structure in geography is the view that knowledge in human geography cannot be generalised, because differences between places—their uniqueness—make it impossible to produce the sort of universal truths developed in science (Roberts, 2014). Roberts is correct in pointing out that human geography cannot produce universal statements of knowledge similar to science. Neither does it have overarching theories such as evolution, but I contend that it can still produce useful generalisations of the types described in this chapter, and create statements that integrate geographical knowledge at several levels of abstraction. The result is a hierarchy of propositions, not of theories, and as there may be several ways to unpack each major concept, different hierarchies could be constructed to suit different contexts. However, these propositions will always have cases that don’t fit, for the reasons identified by Roberts, and this is where the concept of place becomes important. Whereas most disciplines will focus on the general relationship described in a proposition or principle, geographers are likely to focus on the places that are anomalies, because this will identify important factors

34

A. Maude

Table 3.1  From the substantive concept of weather to the key concept of environment: a progression Step Generalisation 9 The biophysical environment supports human life, influences human activities, and is being changed by human actions. 8 Human actions are changing the biophysical environment, in both positive and negative ways. 7 Human actions are changing the global climate, but differently in different places. 6 Climate has an influence on human activities, but the extent of this influence, and how much it can be modified by technology and human organisation, is contested. 5 Climate has a major influence on the vegetation, soils, water resources and agriculture of places. 4 The spatial pattern of world climates identifies ways of explaining their characteristics. 3 Climate is the average types of weather, including seasonal variations, experienced by a place over a long period of time. 2 Seasons describe the average weather for different periods of the year, but different cultures describe the seasons differently, using different criteria. 1 Weather can be described by temperature, rainfall, wind and sunshine.

other than the ones in the proposition. For example, studies show that there is a correlation between national per capita income and life expectancy, but investigating why countries such as Vietnam have a higher life expectancy than the trend line, and countries such as Russia have a lower life expectancy, can reveal much about its determinants and what governments can do to improve it. Here place is being used as an analytical concept. An implication of this hierarchical structure is that knowledge has to be carefully sequenced through the school years. This is illustrated in Table 3.1, which follows the progression of the concept of weather from early primary school. Steps 1 to 4, at the bottom of the figure, are only about weather and climate, but Step 5 brings in vegetation, soils, water resources and agriculture, Step 6 adds the contentious question of the effects of climate on human activities, while Step 7 is about the effects of human actions on climate. Step 8 integrates Step 7 with other examples of human alteration of the environment from other progressions, and is in turn incorporated into a statement of the key concept of environment in Step 9.7 Progressions such as these have an important educational role in that they lead students into higher order thinking (Bennetts, 2005). This is because each step in the hierarchy requires a synthesis of increasingly abstract ideas. Students start by synthesising factual information into a substantive concept, such as climate, which they then combine with other concepts, such as vegetation, to create larger and more abstract generalisations about relationships.

7  There is no space here to adequately discuss the sequencing of conceptual understanding. For ideas see Erickson et al. (2017), and Yak-Foo and Koh (2017).

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

35

3.6  T  he Relationship Between School Subjects and Academic Disciplines The choice of key concepts discussed earlier in this chapter was partly based on an appeal to the authority of the academic discipline of geography, which raises the broader question noted in the introduction of the relationship between a recontextualised school subject and the academic discipline from which it is derived. Bernstein’s view on this issue has been difficult to interpret. On the one hand, when writing about physics, he argued that when recontextualised in schools, physics is no longer derived from ‘some logic internal to physics nor from the practices of those who produce physics. The rules of the reproduction of physics are social, not logical, facts’ (Bernstein, 2003, p.  176). On the other hand, Maton and Muller (2007) point out that if a role of schools is to teach specialised knowledge, as Bernstein recognised, a school subject must have a reasonably close relationship to the parent discipline, and Muller (2006) suggests that Bernstein recognised this in his later work. Michael Young adds a further reason for this relationship, when he writes: The link between subjects and disciplines provides the best guarantee that we have the knowledge acquired by students at school does not rely solely on the authority of the individual teacher but on the teacher as a member of a specialist subject community. (Young, 2013, p. 114).

If these viewpoints are accepted, then the selection of geography’s key concepts must be derived from logic internal to academic geography. However, how these concepts are applied in school geography, and in what contexts and for what purposes, will be different to the academic discipline. There are several reasons for this difference. An obvious one is the need to express concepts and ideas in ways that students of varying ages and experience can comprehend. Another is that school geography may require content that is no longer of current interest to academics. For example, not all of the ideas about place in the seven statements into which the concept was disaggregated earlier can be found in current university textbooks on human or physical geography, yet they are still basic geographical ideas that students should understand. A third reason is that geographic thought in universities is almost entirely about different philosophical approaches to research, such as spatial, humanistic, Marxist, feminist and post-structural. In schools, on the other hand, the emphasis should be on thinking geographically with the subject’s key concepts, because it is these that differentiate geography from other subjects and give it coherence. The purpose of school education is also different to that at university. Deng, writing about secondary school science, argues that the concepts and principles selected for the school curriculum must be based on the disciplines, but their selection and formulation is ‘for the primary purpose of helping students become scientifically literate citizens’, and this choice is inherently social. (Deng, 2007, pp.  518–519) Much the same could be said for geography, except that there is likely to be a variety of opinions on the purpose of school geography.

36

A. Maude

Consequently, while school geography is derived from the academic discipline, it does not simply mirror it at a simpler level. Because of this difference Deng argues that ‘having an academic major in an academic subject area does not ensure that prospective teachers have the specific kind of subject-matter knowledge needed for classroom teaching’ (Deng, 2007, p. 527). I suspect that this is also the case with geography, and has important implications for the preparation of teachers (see also Lambert & Biddulph, 2014).

3.7  Conclusion The recontextualisation of knowledge from the fields in which it is produced into school curricula, students’ textbooks and teachers’ lessons is a very important educational process, because it determines the knowledge, skills and values that students will be taught, yet there is little guidance in the literature on how to recontextualise. This chapter has tried to fill some of this gap by exploring two exemplars of recontextualisation. The first was about a method for selecting geography’s key concepts for use in schools, based on developing criteria for a key concept, and then identifying geographical concepts which meet these criteria. This method produced a division of geography’s major concepts into four key ones (place, space, environment and interconnection), two analytical ones (scale and time), and two evaluative ones (sustainability and human wellbeing), a classification which will help students understand their different roles and functions, and how to use them productively. The second exemplar was about how to recontextualise the selected key concepts. The answer proposed was, first, to express them as understandings that describe geographical ways of thinking and, second, to disaggregate them into progressions that build from factual studies of topics upwards through increasingly abstract generalisations towards the key concept. These progressions lead students into higher-order thinking, and to a rich understanding of the ways that the concepts can be used. These progressions, it was then argued, demonstrate that school geography can have a hierarchical structure of propositions, although not of theories as in the sciences, a conclusion that has significant implications for how the subject should be structured over the school years. Both exemplars also examined the relationship between the school subject and the academic discipline, an important question left somewhat unresolved by Bernstein. The chapter argued that the selection of key concepts for use in schools must be based on the logic of the academic discipline, in opposition to Bernstein. However, the ways these concepts are expressed and used in school geography, and for what purposes, will differ from the academic discipline, as these are social choices and so in agreement with Bernstein. Underlying the argument in this chapter is a belief that it is increasingly difficult to define geography by its subject matter. Instead, it can be defined by its ways of thinking, which are based on its concepts, and these ways of thinking can be applied

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

37

to a very wide range of topics. If this is the case, then how these concepts are selected and expressed, or recontextualised, is of vital importance.

 ppendix 1: Recontextualisations of Geography’s A Key Concepts A. Key Concepts Place  The concept of place is about how the unique characteristics of each place influence the local outcomes of environmental and human processes, and the lives of the people who live in them. Space  The concept of space is about how the space that is the surface of the Earth is perceived, experienced, organised and represented by people; the effects of location in this space on geographical phenomena and the lives of people; and the significance of how phenomena are spatially distributed. Environment  The concept of environment is about how the biophysical environment supports human life, influences human activities, and is being changed by human actions. Interconnection  The concept of interconnection is about how the characteristics of geographical phenomena are influenced by their interrelationships with other phenomena, both within and between places, and the value of holistic and relational thinking.

B. Analytical Concepts Scale  Scale is used to investigate and analyse relationships, by studying them at different scales. Time  Time is used to explain phenomena by understanding how they have developed and changed, and this knowledge may be used to forecast futures.

C. Evaluative Concepts Sustainability and Human Wellbeing  Sustainability and human wellbeing are concepts that can be used to evaluate the environmental and human significance of our observations and findings.

38

A. Maude

References Adams, P. C. (2017). Place. In D. Richardson et al. (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of geography. Wiley Online Library. Bennetts, T. (2005). Progression in geographical understanding. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 14(2), 112–132. Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: an essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157–173. Bernstein, B. (2003). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge. Brooks, C. (2018). Understanding conceptual development in school geography. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 103–114). Routledge. Clifford, N. J., Holloway, S. L., Rice, S. P., & Valentine, G. (Eds.). (2009). Key concepts in geography (2nd ed.). Sage. Creswell, T. (2015). Place: An introduction (2nd ed.). Wiley Blackwell. Deng, Z. (2007). Knowing the subject matter of a secondary-school science subject. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(5), 503–535. Dowling, P. (2014). Recontextualization in mathematics education. In S.  Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 525–529). Springer. Erickson, H. L., Lanning, L. A., & French, R. (2017). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom (2nd ed.). Corwin. Firth, R. (2017). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 275–286). Routledge. Gregory, K. J., & Lewin, J. (2018). A hierarchical framework for concepts in physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography, 42(6), 721–738. Hanson, S. (2004). Who are “we”? An important question for geography’s future. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94, 715–722. Harlen, W. (Ed.). (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Association for Science Education. Harvey, D. (2005). The sociological and geographical imaginations. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 18, 211–255. Jackson, P. (2006). Thinking geographically. Geography, 91, 199–204. Johnson, K. B., Dempster, E. R., & Hugo, W. (2011). Exploring the recontextualisation of biology in the south African life sciences curriculum, 1996–2009. Journal of Education, 52, 27–57. Johnston, R., & Sidaway, J. D. (2015). Have the human geographical can(n)ons fallen silent; or were they never primed? Journal of Historical Geography, 49, 49–60. Lambert, D. (2007). Curriculum making. Teaching Geography, 32(1), 9–10. Lambert, D. (2011). Reviewing the case for geography, and the ‘knowledge turn’ in the English National Curriculum. Curriculum Journal, 22, 243–264. Lambert, D., & Biddulph, M. (2014). The dialogic space offered by curriculum-making in the process of learning to teach, and the creation of a progressive knowledge-led curriculum. Asia-­ Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 210–224. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2010). Teaching geography 11–18: A conceptual approach. OUP. Maton, K., & Muller, J. (2007). A sociology for the transmission of knowledges. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Language, knowledge and pedagogy: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives (pp. 4–33). Continuum. Maude, A. (2013). The vision of geography underlying the Australian geography curriculum. RIGEO [Review of International Geographical Education Online], 3(3), 253–265. Michael, J. (2017). What are the core concepts in physiology? In J. Michael, W. Cliff, J. McFarland, H. Modell, & A. Wright (Eds.), The core concepts of physiology (pp. 27–36). Springer. Michael, J., & McFarland, J. (2011). The core principles (“big ideas”) of physiology: Results of faculty surveys. Advances in Physiology Education, 35, 336–341. Michael, J., McFarland, J., & Wright, A. (2008). The second conceptual assessment in the biological sciences workshop. Advances in Physiology Education, 32, 248–251.

3  Recontextualisation: Selecting and Expressing Geography’s ‘Big Ideas’

39

Milligan, A., & Wood, B. (2010). Conceptual understandings as transition points: Making sense of a complex social world. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(4), 487–501. Mitchell, I., Keast, S., Panizzon, D., & Mitchell, J. (2016). Using “big ideas” to enhance teaching and student learning. Teachers and Teaching, 23(5), 596–610. Muller, J. (2006). On the shoulders of giants: Verticality of knowledge and the school curriculum. In R.  Moore, M.  Arnot, J.  Beck, & H.  Daniels (Eds.), Knowledge, power and educational reform. Routledge. Murphy, A. B. (2018). Geography: Why it matters. Polity Press. Niemi, D., & Phelan, J. (2008). Eliciting big ideas in biology. Conceptual Assessment in Biology II Conference. Rawling, E. (2007). Planning your key stage 3 geography curriculum. Geographical Association. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25, 187–209. Staeheli, L. (2003). Place. In J. A. Agnew & K. Mitchell (Eds.), A companion to political geography (pp. 158–170). Blackwell. Vayda, A. P., McCay, B. J., & Eghenter, C. (1991). Concepts of process in social science explanations. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 21(3), 318–331. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (expanded 2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Design. Yak-Foo, S. Y., & Koh, K. B. (2017). Processes and issues in concept-based curriculum for the humanities. In L.  S. Tan et  al. (Eds.), Curriculum for high ability learners (pp.  169–187). Springer. Young, M. (2010). The future of education in a knowledge society: The radical case for a subject-­ based curriculum. Journal of the Pacific Circle Consortium for Education, 22, 21–32. Young, M. (2013). Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory: A knowledge-based approach. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 101–118.

Chapter 4

Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies Matt Finn

4.1  Questioning Recontextualisation It is a legitimate and useful question to ask: how is this or that geographical concept recontextualised from one site to another? We can do this and ‘see with’ recontextualisation, using the theoretical apparatus as a descriptive model, to make sense of the processes by which “knowledge is selected from the field in which it was produced and transformed for the purpose of acquisition in schools” (Firth, 2018: 279). Indeed, other chapters in this volume do this very productively. However, in this chapter I want to do something different and raise some questions about recontextualisation itself, as conceptualised in Bernstein’s model of the pedagogic device. I argue that the boundaries between the different fields (and the actors that constitute them) are more blurred in practice than might have been understood from the model, and increasingly so. By offering alternative ways of thinking about the relationships between the fields, I draw out implications for how we understand the relationships between the academic discipline of geography and school geography. The effect is to consider how we might better value the teaching and communication of geography in and across all spaces of learning. This opens up new questions, and avenues for research, about the connections, collaborations and exchanges between academic geographer, teacher educator/researcher and school communities. In order to raise these questions, I first outline literature which provides a basic account of recontextualisation as part of the pedagogic device drawing on the writing of Basil Berstein and those who take up these ideas. I then move to raise a M. Finn (*) Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Amory Building, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_4

41

42

M. Finn

number of questions about where geographical knowledge is produced and recontextualised and who is doing so – noting first, that academics are educators and there are teachers which are research-engaged and research-active, and second, that there is no ‘pre-pedagogical knowledge’. These complicate Bernstein’s account of knowledge production, recontextualisation and reproduction. This allows me to explore the spatial imaginaries at work in the pedagogic device and consider the implications for accounts of recontextualisation. In part, this is expressed in the idea that knowledge comes ‘down’ from universities to schools. This opens up avenues for new trajectories and questions which are resonant with geographical work about the spatialities of knowledge production. This task carries some risk. I am bringing the ideas of recontextualisation and the pedagogic device into dialogue with literatures that have quite different purposes, are animated by different problematics, and which pose questions of the theory that it was not intended to address. This would be an uncharitable reading if, as critique, the purpose was dismissive or to devalue the ways in which the theory has already proved useful. Instead, I see this as part of the lively, iterative and generative process of knowledge production. Through staging this kind of encounter limitations may be clarified but also new avenues for investigation highlighted. Bernstein wrote that some of his material was a ‘sketch’ (Bernstein, 2000: 65). A sketch is not intended to be the whole picture – neither in its level of detail nor as accounting for some total perspective. However, such sketches can, and I think do, become reified as more fulsome and universal accounts than theorists like Bernstein intend. This is especially the case when the models are ‘used’ in, or ‘applied’ to, diverse contexts without those contexts speaking back to the theory and pointing up its limitations and possibility for development or indeed, the need for new theorisations. It is to that account that I now turn.

4.2  The Pedagogic Device and Recontextualisation I sketch out here an abbreviated account of Bernstein’s ‘pedagogic device’ which sought to account for the rules by which knowledge becomes pedagogic communication (Bernstein, 1990, 2000; Singh, 2002: 573). He tied this to the action of particular social groups, rules, fields of operation and processes and created a model of these as shown in Fig. 4.1. The distributive rules regulate and hierarchically stratify groups based on the distribution of knowledge among them. These rules also set limits of the thinkable and (as yet) unthinkable, and who may perform the function of producing discourse, or in slightly different language to Bernstein, in producing (new) legitimated knowledge. The distributive rules create fields, or contested social spaces (Singh, 2002) – of production, recontextualisation and reproduction. Recontextualisation rules regulate the process of selecting and transmitting knowledge from one site to another and through the process of recontextualisation transforming it. The evaluative rules concern the regulation of pedagogic practice and assessing the valid

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

43

Fig. 4.1  The device and its structuring. (Adapted from Bernstein, 2000: 37)

acquisition of knowledge and orientations or ‘dispositions’ to that knowledge (Firth, 2018). Bernstein observes three broad hierarchically organised fields. The field of production is associated with the actors and activities which produce knowledge and is typically associated in contemporary societies with universities. The field of recontextualising is associated with the activities through which the knowledge produced is pedagogised or transmitted from the site of production to the site of reproduction. This may be through the ‘official recontextualising field’ (ORF) typically created and dominated by the state and the pedagogic recontextualising field (PRF) such as teacher educators and subject associations. The site of reproduction is associated with the activities of acquisition by teachers and subsequently students in schools. Having sketched out Bernstein’s pedagogic device I will point out two curious features of this model which seem evident here and in the ways in which the model is explicated (such as Singh, 2002). I then draw out the implications of these features for the question of recontextualisation. First, the model provides a truncated view of the field of production by omitting the multiple roles that academics play. Now while this may be seen as sufficiently tangential given the purpose of the model, the effect is significant. The role of knowledge production is separated from the academic’s roles as educators or learner-scholars. The model encodes a symbolic division of academic research from teaching and holds the field of reproduction as external and separate to the field of production. In Bernstein’s account, the fields are populated by various agents who take up different and distinct roles through a division of labour. Here universities – and their academics – are the producers of disciplinary knowledge. Pupils are evaluated on the acquisition of reproduced disciplinary knowledge, pedagogised by those performing roles of recontextualisation. Yet, we could take a moment to consider that a significant proportion of the activities seen across the pedagogic device (as seen in Fig. 4.1) also take place ‘within’ universities. Here, though shaped by wider imperatives and state policies, academics recontextualise the knowledge they have produced for their students – and importantly for other academics – to acquire. And, it is more dialogic than readings of the model might imply (as is suggested by the

44

M. Finn

double-headed arrows in Bernstein’s model, Fig.  4.1) in that the questions and engagements of the students, and other academics, reshape the academic’s own understanding of their knowledge and how they frame and explicate it. This leads to the second curious feature. Second, disciplinary knowledge risks being presented as if it is ‘pre-­pedagogical’ if those in the field of recontextualisation are held to be the ones who take disciplinary knowledge and then pedagogise it. When we talk about disciplinary knowledge what do we mean in material terms? I don’t think it can mean the data from research, as this isn’t self-interpreting knowledge, nor can it mean the knowledge as the private knowing of a phenomena by an academic. Knowledge circulates in academic contexts through communicative acts – be they journal articles, books, conference presentations, lectures – and in some cases through exhibitions, documentaries and other cultural products which may have a range of audiences. These communicative acts necessitate the same kind of pedagogical translation and transformation as takes place across the fields of recontextualisation and reproduction as they are selective, sequenced and take culturally diverse and particular forms. For example a journal article written for a specific journal may necessitate a particular selection and ordering of material and a different writing strategy to another – whilst all seek to inform, persuade and indeed, to educate the reader, whomever that may be. The product, as long as it is not ignored (a depressing reality for any academic), may be seen to add to or challenge existing disciplinary knowledge, but it is not ‘pre-­ pedagogical’. Knowledge is always already pedagogised for its consumers. This is not to say that it is accessible to all consumers. I do agree with Singh’s (2002: 575) argument that the “growth in the volume and complexity of esoteric knowledge (vertical discourse)” means that knowledge producers may not have the time or resources to translate it to an accessible form for “non-specialist consumers”. However, the field of production of a discourse or (to allow for the slippage used by many commentators) knowledge is fully engaged in and not separate to communicative and necessarily pedagogical acts addressed to a range of more or less specialists consumers. When we say that knowledge is recontextualised we must ask from what and for whom. We should not answer disciplinary knowledge and for teachers or pupils if we imagine such disciplinary knowledge is not already variously – and not uniformly – contextualised (and pedagogised) for different audiences. Why do these two curious features matter? Against the larger task of describing relationships between fields of activity and their agents these might seem to be relatively minor concerns. One might ask, ‘so are academics writing the textbooks for schools or sequencing material in curricula for pupils’? The answers in the main might be, ‘no’, though this does vary historically and across national contexts (Fyfe & Yarwood, 2018). In the broadest sense, the divisions of labour and account of social relationships hold. However, Bernstein has a particular spatial imagination of these relations that narrate them as hierarchical and which imply sharp distinctions between these fields and divisions of labour between the actors. I have suggested that as we consider – even in quite broad terms – the field of production and its agents, we don’t see such neat ring-fencing of production from other activities, and we see that knowledge production is itself a pedagogising act. We could look at the

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

45

other fields and raise similar questions. For example, how should we make sense of Lambert and Biddulph’s conception of teachers as curriculum makers (Biddulph, 2018; Lambert, 2016, 2017; Lambert & Biddulph, 2015), or Butt and Collin’s (2018) writing on the knowledge turn which positions teachers as those capable and expected to engaged with disciplinary knowledge directly, along with English A level reform which increasingly normalises engagement with such knowledge directly through readings such as journal articles. This suggests a vision (actualised or not) of teachers as professional knowledge workers who themselves operate across the recontextualisation and reproductive fields. Further, they may also be part of the field of production through research (for example Masters or Doctoral) conducted in schools and with the supervision and accreditation of universities. Despite issues with how well the model functions descriptively, and the contention over the distributive rules that mark boundaries between the activities of the fields and their agents, there are other ways of conceiving this bigger picture.

4.3  Recontextualisation and Spatial Imaginaries Bernstein’s model is a hierarchical model where the field of reproduction is dependent on the field of recontextualisation and these fields together are dependent on the field of production. Whilst it makes room for interchange and contestation between agents there is a predominately downward movement of knowledge between fields (Fig. 4.2). A further slippage in language we may wish to be attentive to is between fields and sites. If fields are social spaces by which certain activities are organised and regulated (Singh, 2002) they are not the same things as the sites of those activities which may have many different locations and forms. Following actor-network theory and broader work in Science and Technology Studies (STS) (for example Latour, 2007 or Law, 2003) we can see the traces of knowledge movement through tracking the ‘actors’ such as journal articles, textbooks as well as people, which may move quite freely in the world across the boundaries implied by theorists who make models. Michael Young (2014: 97, emphasis added), puts it discursively in this way: The knowledge stipulated by the curriculum must be based on specialist knowledge developed by communities of researchers. This process can be described as curriculum recontextualization. However, these research communities are not involved in schools. It follows that the curriculum cannot lay down how access to this knowledge is achieved; a further process of ‘recontextualization’ will be specific to each school and the community in which it is located and relies on the professional knowledge of teachers.

Whilst I welcome the view this offers for the role of teachers, and the need to be attentive to school context without diminishing the ‘curriculum offer’, one can see again the positing of a sharp and complete division between research communities and schools, at least with respect to curriculum matters. These are, to use Latour’s (1993 [1991]) language ‘purified’ notions of social and epistemic communities. Yet Butt and Collin’s (2018) demonstrate this isn’t and need not be so. For all the talk

46

M. Finn

Fig. 4.2  Geography in English Education; ORF is the official recontextualising field and PRF is the pedagogic recontextualising field. (Author’s own after Bernstein, 2000: 37)

and experience of gaps between universities and schools the sense of this is reified by models like Bernstein’s. They do not map, nor suggest, the many points of contact between schools and universities (neither of which are – to put it too strongly – ‘hermetically-sealed containers’ separate from their wider communities). They also ignore the hybrid roles that agents play across the fields of activity. Young’s social realism is here, in my view, insufficiently social where empirical attentiveness suggests a much ‘messier’ (Law, 2003) state of affairs. Not that this relativises truth-­ claims but acts as an invitation to continue the work of description and to attend to the effects on our spatial imaginaries. What alternatives imaginaries may be employed then? Bosch and Gascón (2014) through the Anthropological Theory of the Didactic (ATD) model after Chevallard (1985), figure the relationship as linear and horizontal. In passing, I will also note that Maton’s (2014) account which takes up Bernstein’s work includes relations that are also figured horizontally. While we still have ‘containers’ of knowledge and agents, and the potential for shuttling and interchange between the forms of knowledge, the idea of the ‘noosphere’ is much more diffuse than some of the features of Bernstein’s account. That Bosch and Gascón conceived their model horizontally rather than vertically may be a matter of happenstance but it does raise questions about whether there could be cultural specificity to the models. Are there implicit ideological conditions which make it more likely for the theorist(s) to conceive both knowledge and actors as related horizontally on a more ‘democratic’ plane rather than vertically in dependent and hierarchical relations? I would suggest there are also likely to be effects in thinking this way in the ways in which value judgements are implicitly made in relation to divisions of labour (or through the rules of distribution). These models are not neutral in their effects when a description (an ‘is’) becomes a prescription (a

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

47

‘should’) or proscription (a ‘may not’). I think it is much more likely in Fig. 4.3 that those in a teaching institution (be they teacher educators or teachers) might see themselves as having a legitimate and necessary role in shaping the noosphere, and to make calls on what new knowledge will be produced, than equivalent agents in Fig. 4.2. On the other hand Bernstein’s model may make more experiential sense to those teachers who feel broadly disempowered and de-professionalised in a context where they see the Official Recontextualising Field (especially government ministers with responsibility for education, and examiners, and authorised textbook providers) as particularly dominant. Wilmot (2005) offers a rich empirical account from her doctoral studies of teachers as recontextualisers in two South African schools. While this retains the three fields of Bernstein arranged vertically, Wilmott’s account and diagram (Fig.  4.4) suggest a more complex and temporally shifting set of social relations and non-­ linear processes. That she positions teachers, and argues that they re-positioned themselves, as recontextualisers rather than reproducers is particularly interesting and chimes with the vision of teachers as curriculum makers (who as I attempted to show in Fig. 4.2 are operating across or in the borderlands of the fields of recontextualisation and reproduction). However, Wilmott’s powerful observations don’t seem to have disrupted the heuristic model as they might have done and broadly keep the vertical elements intact while being suggestive of the potential ‘play’ (Bernstein, 2000: 32) where “every time a discourse moves from one position to another, there is a space in which ideology can play.” Puttick (2015) extends this work through his model focusing on teachers as recontextualisers who operate at different degrees of recontextualisation (Fig. 4.5). Though both are fascinating and productive accounts they seem not to trace these differences back to fundamentally trouble the Bernsteinian model. The vertical spatial imagination is retained and also evidenced in teacher’s language (Puttick, 2015: 373) about their positioning relative to academics and the ORF. Although this concern with vertical and horizontal relations are not the same thing as Bernstein’s distinction between vertical and horizontal discourses they do suggest that Bernstein did tend to a planar imaginary of social relations: that is to say he thought in terms of two dimensions (up and down and side to side). And even where other educational theorists are taking on or developing these or related ideas (e.g. Maton and Bosch and Gascón) they tend to conceive these relations in similar linear and planar ways.

Fig. 4.3 Anthropological Theory of the Didactic (ATD) model. (Adapted from Bosch & Gascón, 2014)

48

M. Finn

Fig. 4.4  Heuristic for the analysis of knowledge recontextualisation. (Wilmot, 2005)

Fig. 4.5  Degrees of recontextualisation. (Puttick, 2015)

Whilst it may make for less neat figures, scholarship from Science and Technology Studies (STS) or actor-network theory traditions (for example Law, 2003; Latour, 2007), and subsequent geographers exploring assemblage thinking (for example Anderson & McFarlane, 2011) offer alternative spatial imaginaries: such as the network or assemblage. To think three- or even four-dimensionally with the spatial imaginary of the network would make much more visible what is immanent in Bernstein’s writing, if not apparent in his model, that the processes by which knowledge comes to ‘appear’ as something to be cognised in classrooms is a matter of interrelations between heterogeneous and hybrid agents (or actors) which are dynamic and contested. An imaginary like that in Fig. 4.6 makes it much harder to adduce such clearly and separately

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

49

defined fields of activity (and this could be critiqued as an unacceptable loss) but the actor-network theory approach does not presume a priori what any actors does or is: this is treated as an empirical question. We could follow a particularly – and perhaps unusually – networked (or nodal) teacher and see that they have a trajectory which has seen them gain a significant influence on Twitter where they provoke debate and share resources, complete a masters degree, be invited to write a textbook and so on. A particularly networked (or nodal) academic may have a trajectory that involves producing journal articles, and a textbook for undergraduate use, being invited to give a subject update at a local subject association branch and take a role on the A-Level Content Advisory Board. Now these may be untypical actors perhaps but I think it would be necessary to ‘follow the actors’ to start to be able to answer questions about why some knowledge and not other knowledge is selected for inclusion in curricula, why some producers of geographical knowledge may be drawn on more than others, and why some teachers and not others may be more or less enabled, and more or less expected to recontextualise than others (see for example Eleanor Rawling’s work). Further, we might expect to see both variation and similarities between different geographical contexts. The narratives which might be derived from a networked imaginary would likely give us more complicated accounts than fit the current models and the question must be grasped of whether we allow these to trouble these models or dismiss them as ‘mess’ and hold instead to the neater versions.

The A-Level Content Advisory Board (ALCAB)

Academic X

University X

Textbook Publisher X

Department for Educaon

Teacher X on Twier

Examinaon Board X Academy Chain X

Fig. 4.6  A networked imaginary. This images focused on particular individuals or organisations but could equally focus on other actors that move such as lesson resources, data, policy, affect, tweets and so on. (Photo by Alina Grubnyak on Unsplash, overlaid text added)

50

M. Finn

4.4  Following Further Trajectories By not assuming we know which agents (or actors) are playing which roles we can start to notice more things that might not fit our otherwise purified schemas (Latour, 1993 [1991]). Agents may be taking up hybrid roles (and they may be financially rewarded for doing so) and the fields may not be so neatly separated. This seems to be increasingly so, as social media and information technology continue to provide visibility to, and possibilities for the networking of, different actors. To start to notice that which might not fit our existing models I suggest it is instructive to follow those asking related questions about the geography of knowledge production – along three lines that in different ways ask: where is knowledge produced? These are lines of thought that Margaret Roberts picks up with characteristic thoughtfulness in her 2014 paper. First, geographers such as Jazeel (2016: 663) are engaged in a broad set of work to consider the implications and limitations of the “pervasive EuroAmerican orientation and composition” of the disciplinary community. This can risk a separation between a typically western, white and male academy in which theory and legitimate knowledge is produced, and a field of ‘elsewheres’ which are reductively envisioned as the sites which provide empirical data for theorising. Jazeel quotes the work of Brazilian philosopher Marilena Chauí (2011: 145  in Jazeel, 2016: 657) warning of the risk of authoritarian thinking where: Facts are reduced to examples and tests, while theory is reduced to a formal schema or, as is often stated, a model. Providing reality with the task of mere empirical example and bestowing on theory the role of an empty framework for changeable contents, authoritarian thought frees itself from the disturbing need to confront that which has not yet been thought (the real thus being the here and now) and of undertaking the work of a theory wherein form and content are not separate.

The challenge for geographers, educationalists and others is remain open to being disturbed by the “alterity of place” (Jazeel, 2016: 657) and where we do not simply find new examples from multiple places to slot into, exemplify or modestly rework existing (EuroAmerican) theories or models. Instead we may find untranslatability, or that which may not be recontextualisable. Or, different theorisations than may require the unlearning, or at least provincialisation, of dominant ways of thinking. In this work the presumed ‘we’ is asked to consider our location and presumptions of the extent of our epistemic community and the limits of ‘our’ theorising. This is to trouble the division of academy from the field (i.e. as sites of fieldwork). The implications I draw from this for the current discussion is the need to reprovisionalise, or reprovincialise, the pedagogic device and the form, processes and actors of recontextualisation. In other words to question recontextualisation, as it is currently understood. If the geography education community is a global one we might expect to see both accounts which work with and crucially speak back to models such as the pedagogic device. We might also expect to see other models and theorisations of these social relationships which are less immediately legible because we are encountering alterity which hasn’t been flattened out.

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

51

The second avenue by which geographers have sought to question the geography of knowledge production is through troubling the division of the academy from its communities. This has come through ideas such as the communiversity, and in interventions around the ‘impact agenda’ in the English Higher Education from Pain et al. (2011) and nom-de-plume trio mrs kinpainsby (2008). These envision academics as part of various communities (both geographically near and far) not as separate to them. This is to refuse a dichotomy of being a productive ‘head’ at work and a whole being with interpersonal connections and attachments to places ‘outside’ (mrs kinpainsby, 2008: 294–295). They consider the accountability that may follow from this to leverage an academic’s position and universities’ resources for the benefit of the communities and societies of which they are part – and which may have been subject to disinvestment or disenfranchisement. Whether or not academic geographers are parents, they may find themselves connected to teachers, children and schools. This need not be, and is not always, separated off from an academic’s role as a producer of knowledge. This is to encourage a reconceptualisation of the relationships between Bernstein’s fields of activity to one that highlights (and perhaps also therefore encourages) connections over gaps, and knowledge exchange rather than knowledge dumping, that proceeds down a vertical chain of agents until it reaches a child. Finally, these two lines of enquiry pick up a particular geographic tendency to blur the lines between the categories of knowledge that Bernstein employs of mundane and esoteric. Geography educators who want to advocate for a knowledge-rich geography curriculum may need to deal with a certain squeamishness about academic geographer’s attention to mundane (or horizontal) knowledge. These may presume disciplinary knowledge such as children’s geographies is insufficiently esoteric (in the Bernsteinian sense) and be troubled by approaches like participatory action research in which ‘non-academics’ or people of all ages and backgrounds are involved as “subjects and architects of enquiry” (Fine et al., 2000). This approach is being taking in both human and physical geography (such as Whitman et al., 2015). Participatory action research, children’s geographies and the growing area of the geographies of education (Holloway & Jöns, 2012 provides one of many starting points) complicate the narratives of the separation of fields and of esoteric knowledge from mundane. This could be symptomatic of Bernstein’s notion of a weakening of the power exercised through the distributive rules but equally it could point to the limitations of this model and act as an invitation to explore other spatial imaginaries that figure the social relations differently and which may adduce more convivial encounters.

4.5  Asking Further Questions In this chapter I have raised some questions about recontextualisation – and more broadly, the pedagogic device. I considered the various spatial imaginaries at work in conceptualising the agents of knowledge-related activities that result in

52

M. Finn

cognisable knowledge in a classroom. This was to consider the ways in which the fields of production, recontextualisation and reproduction may be more blurred than implied by Bernstein’s model, and increasingly so with actors taking on hybrid, boundary-­crossing roles. I considered what might be gained by conceiving of these relationships in less hierarchal or horizontal (planar) ways – and what networked, relational spatialities might offer. Attention is drawn to connections over gaps, to knowledge exchange and its transformation and hybridisation. It makes recontextualisation open to a series of empirical questions: • Where and when does the Bernsteinian model work descriptively and what are its geographical and conceptual limitations? • How might different geographical-educational contexts conceive of the social processes by which knowledge is selected and made amenable to acquisition in schools? How do these contexts speak back to, or offer counter-points to, the Bernsteinian model? • How does a relational, networked spatial imaginary reconceive the relationship between the academy, schools and other intermediaries? Who might researchers and practitioners ‘follow’ to better understand the networked circulations of knowledge and its transformations and commodifications? • How might researchers and practitioners make sense of the role of social media, such as Twitter, in connecting, or producing divergence between, diverse educational actors, in the circulation of knowledge, the establishment of expertise and social capital, and the blurring of Bernstein’s fields? Asking questions such as these would allow us to follow several geographical trajectories that reconceive the relationship between the academy and other places and communities. These may provincialize the Bernsteinian model and invite other models or theorisations. These could help us pay attention to different organisations of social relations which may, or yet may not, be conceived in top-down or bottom­up terms. It may also allow for the recognition and valuing of exchange and collaboration between academic, teacher educator/researcher and school communities.

References Anderson, B., & McFarlane, C. (2011). Assemblage and geography. Area, 43, 124–127. Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity (2nd ed.). Rowman and Littlefield. Biddulph, M. (2018). Curriculum Enactment. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 156–170). Routledge. Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2014). Introduction to the anthropological theory of the didactic (ATD). In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs & S. Prediger (Eds.), Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education (Advances in Mathematics Education). Springer. Butt, G., & Collins, G. (2018). Understanding the gap between schools and universities. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 263–274). Routledge. Chevallard, Y. (1985). La Transposition Didactique. Du savoir savant au savoir enseigné (2nd ed.). La Pensée sauvage.

4  Questioning Recontextualisation: Considering Recontextualisation’s Geographies

53

Fine, M., Weis, L., & Weseen, S. (2000). For whom? Qualitative research, representations and social responsibilities. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp. 107–132). Sage. Firth, R. (2018). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 275–286). Routledge. Fyfe, H., & Yarwood, R. (2018). Textbooks: Bridges or barriers to university geography? Geography, 103, 93–96. Holloway, S. L., & Jöns, H. (2012). Geographies of education and learning. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(4), 482–488. Jazeel, T. (2016). Between area and discipline: Progress, knowledge production and the geographies of geography. Progress in Human Geography, 40(5), 649–667. Lambert, D. (2016). Geography. In D. Wyse, L. Hayward, & J. Pandya (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Sage. Lambert, D. (2017). The road to future 3: The case of geography. In D.  Guile, D.  Lambert, & M. Reiss (Eds.), Sociology, curriculum studies and professional knowledge: New perspectives on the work of Michael Young. Routledge. Lambert, D., & Biddulph, M. (2015). The dialogic space offered by curriculum-making in the process of learning to teach, and the creation of a progressive knowledge-led curriculum. Asia-­ Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 210–224. Latour, B. (1993[1991]). We have never been modern (C. Porter, trans.). Harvard University Press. Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press. Law. (2003). Making a Mess with Method. Published by the Centre for Science Studies, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YN, UK, at http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/Law-­ Making-­a-­Mess-­with-­Method.pdf Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge. mrs Kinpaisby. (2008). Taking stock of participatory geographies: Envisioning the communiversity. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33, 292–299. Pain, R., Kesby, M., & Askins, K. (2011). Geographies of impact: Power, participation and potential. Area, 43, 183–188. Puttick. (2015). Geography teachers’ subject knowledge: an ethnographic study of three secondary school geography departments. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Department of Education, University of Oxford. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 187–209. Singh, P. (2002). Pedagogising knowledge: Bernstein’s theory of the pedagogic device. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(4), 571–582. Wilmot, P.  D. (2005). Teachers as recontextualisers: A case study analysis of outcomes-based assessment policy implementation in two South African schools. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Department of Education, Rhodes University, Grahamstown. Whitman, G.  P., Pain, R., & Milledge, D.  G. (2015). Going with the flow? Using participatory action research in physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 39(5), 622–639. Young, M. (2014). The progressive case for a subject-based curriculum. In Young, M and Lambert, D. with Roberts, C. and Roberts, M (Ed.), Knowledge and the future school: Curriculum and social justice (pp. 89–109). Bloomsbury.

Chapter 5

Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography Simon Catling

5.1  Introduction Knowledge is fundamental in the discourse about primary education (Alexander, 2010), vital in the development of children from their earliest years, and essential to the teaching and learning of geography (Catling & Willy, 2018). Developing children’s knowledge of the world through the subject has always been the central concern of primary geography. However, discussions about knowledge and geography have tended to explore recontexting geographical knowledge in secondary education (Firth, 2011a, 2011b; Roberts, 2014; Butt, 2020). There has been limited reference to geography’s knowledge in primary education (Firth, 2013; Young & Lambert, 2014). During the twenty-first century this debate has increasingly emphasised social realist perspectives on knowledge (Young, 2008; Young & Muller, 2016), with the effect that there has been limited consideration given to epistemological aspects in the debate. It is important that epistemology in primary geography is addressed to examine what is recontextualised in geography with younger children. This chapter begins by considering the idea and focus of recontextualising knowledge production for primary geography.

S. Catling (*) Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_5

55

56

S. Catling

5.2  Recontextualising Knowledge for Primary Geography The role of primary class teachers, as with secondary specialists, is to develop their children’s subject knowledge (Firth, 2015), though geography is but one of the subjects they teach (Alexander, 2010). This requires that primary teachers understand the nature of the school subject of geography, alongside its appropriate pedagogy and resources (Catling and Willy, 2018; Barlow & Whitehouse, 2019). In so doing, their challenge involves reconstituting geographical knowledge for their children through topics which are consistent with the nature of disciplinary geographical knowledge and engage and enhance their children’s understanding, enabling them to begin to understand the nature, depth and breadth of geography. Teaching primary geography requires the recontextualistion of academic geography, its translation and transmission from the university and related sources into the school subject. This is supported in primary teachers’ pre-service education and through publications on the primary geography curriculum and its teaching and learning (Scoffham & Owens, 2017; Pike, 2016; Willy, 2019) as well as by national subject associations. Recontextualisation describes the reconstruction of disciplinary knowledge into school knowledge so that it can be taught effectively with novice learners in the school curriculum (Bernstein, 2000; Maton, 2014). Recontextualisation is based in the subject’s knowledge structure, themes, theories and ways of working. It is what enables early years and primary teachers and, in time, children, to appreciate that primary geography and university geography are based in the same ideas, areas of interest, methods of investigation and ways of thinking, though the focus of primary geography may appear less directly aligned with knowledge production at the frontiers of geographical enquiry and theorising. Analysing Bernstein’s argument about the recontextualisation of academic geography into school geography, Firth (2018) notes that while identifying ‘official’ recontextualising of a subject, such as through national subject curriculum requirements, Bernstein excludes teachers from ‘pedagogic’ recontextualisation, that is the process of reconstructing and teaching a subject such as geography for children. Yet this is what primary teachers do, in effect translating the nature of geographical knowledge into geography curriculum topics through which children learn through the subject about the world, taking them beyond their current experience and knowledge. In developing and extending their geographical knowledge, children are inevitably inducted into the range of thinking and approaches within the subject, perhaps unaware of this process, especially when geography may be taught unidentified within an interdisciplinary and integrated framework. Yet the question remains, and it is not often asked (Firth, 2013, 2018): what is this geographical knowledge? The tendency, even within the debates about the recontextualision of knowledge and about how such knowledge is powerful (Brookes, 2011; Firth, 2011a, 2011b, 2018; Lambert, 2019; Stoltman et al., 2015), is to refer to knowledge either as a catch-all term, to examine its structural base, as Bernstein (2000) and others do (Guile, 2018), or to debate the distinctions between it and everyday knowledge (Young & Muller, 2016). In a key sense this misses a

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

57

major value of recontextualisation, particularly for primary schooling, which is the nature of the disciplinary knowledge base on which a school subject draws and which it sets into the school context, be this with 5–6 or 9–10 year olds. For a subject, such as geography, to remain true to its discipline, it is essential that the nature(s) of its knowledge discern the school subject across all school age phases. This involves recognising its epistemological basis with other influences on geography’s curriculum construction and pedagogy. The purpose in this chapter, therefore, is to focus, through an epistemological eye, on what the disciplinary and subject knowledge is in primary geography, in order to illustrate what it is in academic geography that is recontextualised as primary geography. The purpose is to shine a light on the diversity of knowledge that is geography for primary children, and to indicate the importance of recognising and appreciating geography in this way for the subject, primary teachers and younger children in understanding the world.

5.3  Considering Dimensions of Geographical Knowledge Three dimensions of geographical knowledge are explored to illustrate that geography’s knowledge production is recontextualised for the primary curriculum and to demonstrate that the nature of geographical knowledge is not a ‘single story’ but complex. The term ‘knowledge’ is used in discussion about the nature of and relationship between the subject’s factual base, its structure and its core ideas. These threads of knowledge are considered first. Yet this is but one way to think about what knowledge means. Epistemologists have differentiated what they term ‘kinds’ of knowledge to distinguish the various types of insight into the world that knowledge provides (Bernecker & Pritchard, 2011). Three kinds of knowledge are used to illustrate this insight. The third dimension considers paradigmatic perspectives on knowledge which geographers use in their disciplinary debates, investigations, theories and applications. Four examples are given of this approach to knowledge. An epistemological perspective demonstrates that knowledge in geography is multidimensional (Couper, 2015; Cresswell, 2013). To be true to the subject, this is inevitably the case in and for primary geography, for recontextualising geographical knowledge for primary children empowers their sense of geography and its value.

5.3.1  Threads of Geographical Knowledge Clarifying knowledge in geography, the Geographical Association emphasised three ‘forms of geographical knowledge’ (GA, 2011, 2): its ‘core knowledge’, ‘content knowledge’ and ‘procedural knowledge’. Core knowledge is described as geography’s information, or ‘extensive world knowledge’: the subject’s ‘vocabulary’ (GA, 2009). Content knowledge is the thematic structure of geography’s school

58

S. Catling

Fig. 5.1  The three threads of geographical knowledge (Catling, 2019)

curriculum content: its ‘grammar’, through which children learn about geography’s processes and perspectives. Procedural knowledge identifies the subject’s distinctiveness – its core concepts, such as place, scale and sustainability. These forms of knowledge, is was argued, are essential to develop all pupils’ geographical understanding of the subject at all ages. Epistemologically, these forms of geographical knowledge can be expressed as propositional knowledge, substantive knowledge and procedural knowledge (Catling, 2019). They are the knowledge threads which underpin primary geography (Fig. 5.1). They are intertwined and provide the essence and strength of geographical thinking. Geographical education aims to develop children’s appreciation and application of geographical knowledge in and beyond their immediate lives, so that children become involved in engaging ‘mentally with questions about people, society and the planet … [and] … identify, assimilate, analyse and communicate data of various kinds … productively’, using relational or holistic, conceptual thinking (GA, 2011, 3; Rawding, 2013). Effective geography teaching and learning only occurs when all three are involved, from the earliest years. Primary teachers need to understand this. It helps to begin with an example to illustrates the nature and role of the threads of geographical knowledge through an engaging primary geography topic. This illustrates the ways that the threads are recontextualised for the primary school context. A popular primary topic is ‘volcanoes’, about their nature, significance and impact. This example illustrates that the three knowledge threads are essential elements to include and involve in every primary geography theme. The volcanoes example in Fig. 5.2 indicates the ways in which the three threads of geographical knowledge dynamically underpin and interplay in an exemplary geographical topic. In studying volcanoes, primary children implicitly, rather than overtly, use geography’s ‘big ideas’, while they build up their factual information about the world and are engaged in studying one of geography’s systematic themes. This way of

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

59

The world has many active volcanoes. News media and web sources provide information about these and many volcanic events that occur. Primary children can see on maps where volcanoes are in the world and via the web find many images of them. This propositional knowledge is intrinsically integrated with the thread of geography’s substantive knowledge about vulcanicity. When children investigate where and how volcanoes erupt, the varieties of volcanic events and the processes that create them and their consequences, they investigate vulcanicity and its impacts. They may link this with geographic studies of mountain development, plate tectonics and natural hazards to extend and deepen their knowledge and interest. Children examine the natural processes and human impacts involved, exploring interrelated aspects of physical, human and environmental geography and places. This enables them to develop their understanding of this geographical theme. Primary children’s understanding of volcanoes is underpinned by geography’s procedural knowledge: children engage with geography’s ‘big ideas’. ‘Place’ helps them consider the variety of places where volcanoes are, what they are like, what goes on there and how they differ from other places: it contributes to awareness of ‘place’. The concept of ‘environment’ underpins the physical and human processes causing and modifying volcanoes, describing what is to be seen and noting their effects on people. Children encounter concepts such as ‘environmental impact and sustainability’ in exploring why farming occurs in volcanic areas and how people respond to eruptions. They engage with ‘space’ when locating volcanoes and noting their distribution, patterns and networks. They use the idea of scale to examine what is happening world-wide, as well as in one place, when investigating the Earth’s natural processes at work, and identifying the varied effects of volcanic eruptions on people and places around the world. They use ‘interconnection’ to recognise the links between earthquakes and plate tectonics and to explore how volcanic environments connect lives through activities like agriculture, mining, trade and tourism. Primary children examine people’s views about and responses to living with volcanoes, using the concept of ‘cultural awareness and diversity’ when interpreting these; people’s perspectives and actions in volcanic areas and away from them are diverse. Fig. 5.2  Geographical knowledge threads in a primary volcanoes topic

thinking about the geography with which children engage needs to run throughout their geography curriculum, both for 5–6  year olds investigating a geographical topic on play spaces and for 10–11  year olds examining climate change and its effects. The older primary children become the more information they build up in the context of a particular theme in geography, be these studies of trade or biomes, and the more appropriate it is that they know about and discuss geography’s ‘big ideas’ and how these help and enhance their geographical awareness, understanding and thinking, connecting their factual and systematic subject knowledge. It should always be that the three threads of geographical knowledge interplay within geography in the primary curriculum. These need some further elucidation to explain their focus and significance for geographical knowledge. The thread most publically associated with geography is its propositional knowledge. Epistemologically, propositional knowledge refers to ‘true belief’, that is, accurate information about the world, such as our planet is named Earth, the names of the streets where you live and your local shopping centre, cumulonimbus is a

60

S. Catling

towering water-laden storm cloud, and Quito is the capital of Ecuador. In geography such facts tell us about what is where at a range of scales, what places are known for, and their features and layout. Factual knowledge is important in primary children’s learning of geography, contributing to their making sense of the world. It provides the vocabulary for features, goods, routes, weather and much more that is helpful to living in places and in being informed about the wider world beyond direct experience. It provides the descriptive ‘what’ and ‘where’ of the subject. This informational knowledge is basic to ‘geography’, but it needs the subject’s disciplinary context for meaning (Counsell, 2018). Without context such information is little other than lists of facts, lacking structure and value. Facts provide only a superficial sense of geography, though this is often people’s residual sense of the subject. Information does not clarify the nature of geography: indeed, it is not geography as such. Other knowledge threads are essential to appreciate which information is geographically relevant; these re-context the facts geography engages with. Counsell (2018) argues that deeper disciplinary knowledge is essential for making sense of subject information. This indicates the need for the second thread: geography’s substantive knowledge, which is organisational, enabling connections to be identified, classified and framed to create the substance of the subject. These substantive aspects recontextualise information to give it subject meaning. Geography’s substantive knowledge enables children to order and make sense of the world, locally to globally. It provides the analytic dynamic about the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of the world, the understanding of the processes at work set in an explanatory framework. For geography this is the systematic structure of the subject, about the world’s places and regions and their human and physical geography. It is about natural and social planet-wide events, activities and impacts. It situates hypothesising, investigating and theorising within geography. For primary geography these substantive aspects of geography include place studies and themes such as trade, weather, energy, mountains and agriculture. These aspects appear across primary geography curricula, recontextualising and purposing propositional facts. Primary children are introduced to them, inducting them into understanding explanatory processes, changes and effects at work within and across geography’s systematic studies, for example about the causes and impacts of climate changes, migration, river floods, and settlement development and decline. Thematic geography provides the topics in primary geography; it structures the subject through its substantive ‘content’ knowledge. Inevitably, it is selective, directed by what is regarded as important in a particular nation or school within the constraints of the time available for and the curriculum organisation of primary geography, be this inter-disciplinary or subject focused. Yet this is not enough. The third knowledge thread is fundamental. It runs through and across geography’s systematic aspects providing cohesion to its diverse thematic studies. This is geography’s thread of procedural knowledge, which distinguishes it as the subject it is. Geography’s procedural knowledge enables thinking geographically and applying propositional and substantive knowledge usefully and appropriately. Procedural knowledge runs within and across geography’s themes. It provides the subject’s orientation and sense of itself through its key concepts or ‘big ideas’, such

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

61

as scale, environment, sustainability and interconnections. Their application to geography’s substantive knowledge is central to geographical thinking and application. The key concepts support and enable the enquiry dimension of geography through geography’s holistic approach (Jackson, 2006; Rawding, 2013; Catling & Willy, 2018) to place and environmental investigations, including fieldwork and mapping. They underpin the questions geography asks (such as: What and where? Why there? With what effect? Where else? What to do?) to aid the understanding of people, places and environments and the processes, decision-making, problem-­ solving and issues-analysis geography explores, studies, reports on and positions in relation to the future. Geography’s ‘big ideas’, connecting its range of interests and substantive knowledge, apply across all that primary geography studies, local and distant places and topics such as water, plate tectonics and settlements. There has long been debate about the significant concepts at the heart of geography, though there is broad agreement about the four ‘big ideas’ of place, space, environment and scale (Catling & Willy, 2018). This identifies geography’s dynamic nature as a reflective, analytic, evaluative and evolving discipline. Its key concepts create geography to be the essential subject that it is. They help children develop the idea of place across a variety of contexts and examples and begin to appreciate the significance of scale in the ways in which they perceive, investigate and understand natural and human events and outcomes. The subject’s core concepts distinguish geography in the primary curriculum through recontextualising the meaning of its ‘vocabulary’ and ‘grammar’ holistically. Propositional, substantive and procedural knowledge are the intertwined essential threads of primary geography. Children need (propositional) factual knowledge about places, environments and lives to be aware of them. They gain some of this through their familiar encounters, and they build up a range of such knowledge about other places environments and lives, near and distant, from everyday sources as well as in school. Primary children benefit greatly when they encounter a wider range of such information within their geographical studies. By examining information about the world in the context of (substantive) geographical themes, they develop their understanding of places and environments through geography’s systematic thread, enabling them to extend and deepen their geographical thinking. In beginning to apply, during their primary and later schooling, the (procedural) key concepts of geography, children start to internalise a geographical way of thinking which they can begin to use as they investigate places, environments and lives, enhancing their understanding of the world. It is this which Fig. 5.2 illustrates.

5.3.2  Kinds of Geographical Knowledge Identifying knowledge threads is one way to consider the nature of geography’s knowledge. Knowledge is recognised and appreciated to be varied and contested by epistemologists. Their debates and challenges concern knowledge’s foundational

62

S. Catling

concepts and arguments about its structure, analytic modes and kinds of knowledge (Bernecker & Pritchard, 2011; Hetherington, 2019). It is argued that various kinds of knowledge can be identified, such as empirical knowledge, religious knowledge and semantic knowledge, which have distinctive foci and offer their own insights and approaches. They recontextualise the idea that knowledge is a singularity. By noting and distinguishing the various kinds of knowledge they identify the different ways people understand and think about the world. Recognising them within geography recontextualises its study as multi-dimensional, involving various discourses which help children to view and understand the world. For primary geography several kinds of knowledge are readily identified, reflecting the discussions within geography about what, how and why we know about the world. Younger children’s thinking about their places, environments and the wider world involves them in using and reflecting on different kinds of knowledge. These help to describe and illuminate their understanding of and different ways of engaging with and responding to the world, influenced by their varied experiences, backgrounds and contexts. They reflect the range of ways of knowing in geography (Holt-Jensen, 2018) and provide a fuller sense of geographical knowledge than has often been acknowledged (Golledge, 2002). What emerges is that there is no ‘single’ knowledge perspective in geography for children in the ways they develop, learn to and make sense of the world; rather there are multiple ways. Fostering and enabling children’s developing personal and new knowledge of the world requires recognising their own and the subject’s kinds, investigations and applications of geographical knowledge. The kinds of knowledge primary children utilise include perceptual knowledge, personal knowledge, practical knowledge, memory knowledge and aesthetic knowledge, among others. Here, empirical, local and ethical kinds of knowledge illustrate that in primary geography various knowledge perspectives are essential to help children make sense of their experiences and develop, indeed recontextualise, their wider and deeper sense of the world. In each of these contexts geography utilises the three threads of geographical knowledge. A strong tradition in geography has been in empirical knowledge. This involves investigations using universal standards and rules derived from scientific method to state objective facts about the environment, such as what it is like, the processes involved, the causes of change and recognised impacts. In primary geography empirical knowledge has always been central. It has provided information about the world through evidence-based secondary sources, with children using globes, maps and satellite photographs to learn about the continents and oceans and the planet’s major natural and human features. Primary geography includes investigating natural processes such as weather and climate, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and their consequences for the landscape and people. It examines places across the world about which children are informed at a range of geographic scales. Children develop empirical knowledge through active investigation at a local level, gathering information through fieldwork about local weather and people’s responses to it, investigate the levels, causes and effects of air pollution in  local streets, and examine neighbourhood housing and amenities. Their studies involve comparison with other communities and contexts through direct study and by using evidential secondary

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

63

sources to identify commonalities and diversity and reasons for these. In such studies children gain factual geographical knowledge, introductions to geographical themes and awareness of geography’s key concepts. A local knowledge focus is different epistemologically. It is shared community knowledge concerning the local and known wider world. It is based on indigenous experience and understanding in and of that place and its people, accumulated over time (even generations) which affects the lives, actions and what counts as important in and for that community, for example about local ecology, shopping and global connections (Ellen et al., 2003; Billick & Price, 2010). Local knowledge, at times termed indigenous knowledge, enables new residents to become acquainted with the character of communities and neighbourhoods and to access what may not otherwise be obvious. Primary children have local knowledge, which varies between children related to where they live, family, peer group, local travel and explorations, and more. Indeed, teachers rarely know the locale in the way their children do. It involves local investigations, such as how people use and appreciate the area, care and concerns, changes and local decision-making. Children examine their own perspectives on their local natural and social environment, its particular connections and interactions with its wider region and nationally and internationally. Their own and adults’ local mental maps and geographies indicate ways local people see and know the area differently. For primary geography, indigenous knowledge deepens children’s locality knowledge through sharing each other’s information, recontextualised through systematic and place studies and used to foster awareness of geography’s ‘big ideas’. Geography engages with ethical knowledge, concerning values and justifications about moral acts and contexts which affect people and places. It considers good and bad and right and wrong human actions and their impacts at different scales on environments and communities (Attwood, 2018). People develop moral knowledge socially from infancy; it is enhanced or modified in and out of school, reflecting such values as how to treat and respond to others, what is fair or selfish, and how to look after what is theirs and shared. Geographical ethical knowledge is contentious because it is about ways in which people behave in and affect the environment and other people. An important ethic which children encounter from pre-school onwards is care for the environment; people want their places respected and looked after, such as the local streets and park. Ethics explores environmental gains and losses, for instance, in relation to whom, where and with what impact about a new urban development. Primary children investigate topics like street change, migration and resource extraction in a valued natural environment, perhaps far away. They build geography’s ethical knowledge through direct experience in their places and from the many stories they encounter. Geography enables them to recontextualise and examine their stances on place-based and environmental concerns and issues, such as a proposed change in land use and the arguments for and against this and its possible impact, and the varieties of local or global pollution, people’s concerns and ways to tackle this. Primary children consider empirical knowledge in such cases while they examine the values, different viewpoints and moral judgements involved in these geography topics. They express views, reflect on and/or develop their

64

S. Catling

values, even change their minds, about people, places and environmental matters. They learn to justify their position and consider where this leads. Through their geographical studies inevitably they reflect on their moral knowledge and wider social ethical stances drawing on geography’s key concepts. These examples illustrate that when children examine place and thematic aspects of geography, they engage with different kinds of geographical knowledge. Investigating the nature of a neighbourhood, places elsewhere and different geographical themes involves empirical, local and ethical knowledge, as well as others such as aesthetic, practical and memory kinds of knowledge. Geography’s disciplinary studies and primary school geography use several kinds of knowledge to foster understanding of the world more fully and deeply from different perspectives. Different kinds of knowledge tell different and multiple stories. The application of these and other kinds of knowledge within geographical studies recontextualises these aspects of the subject to expand and deepen primary children’s understanding, and in doing so engages children with the threads of geographical knowledge.

5.3.3  Lenses of Geographical Knowledge The discipline of geography engages with differing perspectives on knowledge which provide its various theoretical standpoints, for instance spatial science, exceptionalism, humanism and post-colonialism, which are considered here. These theoretical stances, or lenses, affect how geographical knowledge is considered, interpreted and accepted or rejected. They provide a variety of ways to identify, distinguish, question, critique and elaborate the knowledge on which they focus (Johnston & Sidaway, 2016; Couper, 2015; Cresswell, 2013). As with kinds of knowledge, each knowledge lens within geography is contested and has limitations, but each provides pertinent perspectives in and for primary geography. Important in geography has been spatial science. For some, geography is fundamentally about the spatial aspects, dimensions and processes of the Earth and its people (Holt-Jensen, 2018). It has been an empirically-based approach to understanding places and the world, drawing on mathematics and geometry, but it is also perceived in terms of relative, qualitative ideas about space as a multi-layered dynamic in the environment and people’s minds (Massey, 2005). A key facet of spatial science has been its positivist nature which helped to promote ‘space’ as a key concept in geography. Its interest includes the spatial as a physical reality and a relative dimension in people’s lives. For primary geography the spatial science lens provides opportunities to engage with knowledge about the location of places and features locally and globally using local and world maps. Children examine the spatial structure and the spatially-based interplay, for example, of the features and aspects of rivers and on- and off-street parking, with children mapping these alongside using published, including GIS, maps to study distributions and relationships. Examining the distribution of places to which younger children are taken for family shopping and day visits or holidays, at different scales, involves developing their

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

65

wider spatial sense of the region and world and considering ways and routes to travel to these places and reasons for being where they are. Such a geographical lens helps primary children develop understanding and appreciation of the spatiality of the world, while also introducing them to the concept of scale. It engages them in propositional, substantive and procedural knowledge in the subject. Another lens on geographical knowledge is exceptionalism, focused on identifying and describing the distinctive nature of Earth’s individual places and regions to capture why somewhere is like it is (Johnston and Sidaway, 2016). Such studies remain active, if contested, in geography, enabling similarities and differences to be elucidated while describing the coherence of specific regions and the concept of region at various scales. Exceptionalist knowledge emphasises particularity, difference and diversity: what is special and specific about somewhere, making it the place, area or region that it is. Aspects of exceptionalism continue in primary geography, for instance in contrasting local to regional and national places. Primary children live in a specific neighbourhood, offering them particular features, sites and affordances. While there may be similarities to and overlaps with other neighbourhoods, each locality is a unique place to and for its inhabitants, not least its children. While primary geography studies the features and activities in each place, it looks also at the specifics and peculiarities which provide the place’s character. In looking at other localities nationally and elsewhere in the world, primary children examine commonalities with their own place and note the differences between places, each place’s special character and what makes it distinct from other places  – in other words, how it is exceptional and significant for those who live there, providing their sense of belonging. This perspective is scaled up when studying a locality’s region and nation, especially the latter to encourage children to identify with their country, why it should be valued by them and that they belong. The exceptionalist lens recontextualises the notion of identity to give it personal meaning through place. The humanistic lens on geographical knowledge emphasises the focus on people ‘being-in-the-world’, how they relate to the world and make meaning of and invest meaning in it. It looks, too, at the impacts of people’s meaning-making on their own and other’s lifeworlds. It concerns how individuals act in the world and why. Humanistic geography recognises that different people have different experiences of places, environments, cultures and societies and that these are individual and shareable (Holt-Jensen, 2018). It explores cognitive and affective as well as sensual and spiritual experiences in places and social and physical environments, influenced by and influencing personal experiences, engagement, feelings and responses, central to children’s development, supporting their senses of place and home. Though primary children seemingly encounter the same real, ‘external’ world their experiences in and of it are individual, while variably shared in families and with peers and others. In local geography studies children explore their responses to the area and about each other’s information, understandings, feelings and ways of acting in and relating to their area. They bring different experiences in and build their sense of the wider world through, for instance, regional and/or international journeys and visits, information and views from family and peers, and access to news, leisure and social media. Their humanistic geographical knowledge is marked by how, when

66

S. Catling

and where they have encountered it, such as in their investigations of people’s views about places and other aspects of the world, lives elsewhere, hazardous events and where they might wish to visit. The humanistic knowledge lens recontextualises for children their personal geographies and develops their geographical horizons, in this way building their information about the world, employing systematic studies and making connections through geography’s core concepts. Postcolonialism provides a broader lens on geographical knowledge. It examines ways that power shapes inequalities in and between places, communities and peoples. It critiques the impacts of attitudes drawn from residual senses of ‘mastery’ over ‘elsewheres’ and others – at home and abroad – which reinforce power structures and underpin views and values about ethnicity, gender, religion and class, and privileges some voices while making subalterns of others (Jazeel, 2019). Postcolonialism questions attitudes and values in societies affecting why, how and with what effect injustices continue in people’s lives and places. Postcolonial knowledge recontextualises the ways in which places, society and the environment may be perceived and conceived. Primary geography’s place studies may well include countries about which residual colonial attitudes influence their portrayal as less economically developed and exotic tourism sites. The postcolonial lens raises critical and discerning questions for children to investigate about viewing, contextualising, describing and feeling about ‘other’ peoples, cultures and environments. Postcolonialism requires that the authentic voices of those elsewhere, in minorities and marginalised in home societies, are heard rightfully about their lives, cultures, places and environments  – that is, listened to and accredited within geography’s array of knowledge. Exploring ‘insider’ local perspectives provides immediate and contextual rather than external insights into matters such as water and sanitation access, migration, farming and trade realities (including fair-trade), and tourism provision and impacts. Children’s voices, often marginalised, should similarly be heard about their geographical experiences, knowledge, views and concerns, not ‘othered’ as less informed or significant. This challenges primary geography to be open and critically aware to enable children to question how the world and their home nation are perceived. It requires that topics such as climate change are properly engaged with and children’s perspectives are sought, heard and debated in geography. The postcolonial knowledge lens sharpens and deepens geographical enquiry through criticality and others’ viewpoints, and recontextualises benign geographical studies for primary teachers and children as insightful and challenging about the subject and its pedagogy. Each of these lenses offers different perspectives about the nature, vitality and impact of geographical knowledge. They recontextualise differently ways in which geographical knowledge is and can be conceived in primary geography, indeed, how geography’s facts, themes and key concepts are understood and interpreted. The postcolonial lens posits that knowledge about inequality and power are aspects of the geography of the school site and local neighbourhood as well as nationally and of other places and in geographical themes such as on resource and energy access. This challenges primary geography knowledge that tends towards exceptionalist place studies and a focus in spatial science which does not necessarily content the

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

67

natural, economic and social influences affecting places and environments, as in the debate about spatial and natural and human processes in the climate crisis and necessary local, national and global actions. Geography’s humanistic lens offers insights into people’s knowledge of the world and its application, what is shared and differentiated between individuals and communities, why and with what impact. These knowledge lenses are complemented by others unexamined here, such as feminist, Marxist and post-structuralist perspectives. They identify that geographical knowledge for children and in primary geography has multiple dimensions.

5.4  Conclusion Three ways to consider the idea of knowledge in primary geography have been presented, showing that geographical knowledge contains not a single story but a multiplicity of insights. Examples have illustrated how these dimensions of academic geography are recontextualised within the primary geography curriculum. It is the diversity of insights which geographical knowledge offers that provides the basis for recontextualising and extending the ways primary children build their understanding and appreciation of the world. The subject’s knowledge threads provide a structural base for this understanding, distinguishing the informational, thematic and conceptual underpinnings of geography. The kinds and lenses of geographical knowledge provide the dimensions and dynamics that support primary children’s learning in various ways, empowering them through their emerging and developing knowledge of the subject during their schooling. In Fig.  5.2 the example of volcanoes outlined the interplay of the threads of propositional, substantive and procedural geographical knowledge. Figure 5.3 illustrates the kinds and lenses of geographical knowledge involved in that popular primary topic. Others geography topics could be articulated similarly. This example demonstrates the varieties of geographical knowledge with which primary children engage in a particular geographical topic and reinforces that such a range of knowledge is essential for children to build their understanding of the world. It illustrates how a primary geography topic recontextualises knowledge for younger children. Indeed, by recognising geography’s multiple insights, the subject is richer and enriches children’s learning. Through formal geographical studies children develop over time fuller and deeper knowledge they can apply effectively. Their geographical knowledge enables them to learn about themselves and the subject appropriate to their context and development, supporting them to articulate their sense of the nature and value of geography. Developing subject knowledge enables children to think geographically and to act thoughtfully about and in the world, implicitly employing various threads, kinds and lenses of geographical knowledge. In a complex and challenging world considering geography’s knowledge in this way articulates the power of geography, and indicates ways in which geographical knowledge empowers children, as Maude

68

S. Catling

The kinds of and lenses on knowledge on which geography draws recontextualise how a topic such as vulcanicity distinguishes and develops subject knowledge for primary children. Empirical kinds of knowledge explain the natural processes and impacts in creating and eroding volcanoes and makes connections with the Earth’s tectonic structure. It evidences reasons for people living and farming in such potentially hostile environments. The spatial science lens investigates the patterns and networks, locally and more widely, showing the distributive reach of trade, for instance, arising from quarrying volcanic rock. The humanistic knowledge lens provides insights into the values of those who live and work in such places, what these places mean to them, and their senses of place and belonging. The exceptionalist lens investigates and describes particular volcanic environments to encapsulate their distinctiveness and character. The local, indigenous kind of knowledge indicates what the key aspects of specific volcanic areas are that appeal to those living and working there, what makes each their place, and how and why they live and work the way they do in that area and identify with it. Ethical kinds of knowledge explore people’s decisions to remain in and return to volcanic sites, and what to prepare for and undertake, should disaster strike. The postcolonial lens questions the power structures and forces at work which hold people in their roles in activities such as trade and tourism and how injustices might be addressed, not least by engaging with the lives of those living there. Studying volcanoes, a popular primary geography topic, enables children to gain insights through using the varied kinds of and lenses on knowledge which geography applies to know about, understand and appreciate the world. These geographical knowledge kinds and lenses give a deeper sense of and meaning to the threads within geographical knowledge. They complement and enhance each other. Fig. 5.3  Kinds and lenses of geographical knowledge in a primary volcanoes topic

argues (2018), contributing importantly to the case for the significance of geographical education for children of all ages. Knowledge is imbued with varied meanings, from information to subjects’ structures and from approaches in subject investigations and explanations to the ‘big ideas’ used to give focus and meaning. For knowledge to make best sense in an educational context it is essential to recognise and appreciate the distinctions between the kinds of knowledge employed, the lenses through which knowledge explores a subject and the threads that provide the basis for making sense of knowledge for geographical studies and in everyday life. Recontextualising academic knowledge into school knowledge, as in geography, enables primary children to make better sense of the local and larger world they inhabit through their encounters with and in applying the varieties of knowledge production in academic geography

5  Reflecting on Knowledge and Primary Geography

69

in their own contexts. However, children’s geographical knowledge has value only if it empowers them, which requires that it is reconstituted effectively for them. This is an important role for primary teachers who need to understand the significance of the various types of knowledge which geography involves – and to realise that when different aspects of knowledge are privileged or underplayed, such as when spatial science or ethical knowledge is promoted over local or postcolonial knowledge, children’s geographical learning and understanding is constrained, even distorted. Knowledge matters in primary geography. It provides geography’s authoritative voice. Knowledge is not singular; the subject is poorer when some aspects are prioritised above others. Recontextualising geography for younger children means balancing the diversity of its knowledge for their own and society’s benefit. Primary children need to learn through the threads, kinds and lenses of knowledge that create and sustain geography. This empowers them and enables them across time to contribute thoughtfully, critically and creatively in society for their own, their community’s and the world’s future.

References Alexander, R. (Ed.). (2010). Children, their world, their education: Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge primary review. Abingdon: Routledge. Attwood, R. (2018). Environmental ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barlow, A., & Whitehouse, S. (2019). Mastering primary geography. London: Bloomsbury. Bernecker, S., & Pritchard, D. (Eds.). (2011). The Routledge companion to epistemology. Abingdon: Routledge. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique (Rev Ed.). Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc Billick, I., & Price, M. (Eds.). (2010). The ecology of place. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brookes, C. (2011). Geographical knowledge and professional development. In G.  Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 165–180). London: Continuum. Butt, G. (2020). Geography education research in the UK: Retrospect and prospect – The UK case within the global context. Cham: Springer. Catling, S. (2019). Key concepts. In T.  Willy (Ed.), Leading primary geography (pp.  16–27). Sheffield: Geographical Association. Catling, S., & Willy, T. (2018). Understanding and teaching primary geography. London: Sage. Counsell, C. (2018). Taking curriculum seriously. Impact, 4(Autumn), 6–9. Couper, P. (2015). A student’s introduction to geographical thought: Theories, philosophies, methodologies. London: Sage. Cresswell, T. (2013). Geographic thought: A critical introduction. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Ellen, R., Parkes, P., & Bicker, A. (Eds.). (2003). Indigenous environmental knowledge and its transformations. London: Routledge. Firth, R. (2011a). Debates about knowledge and the curriculum: Some implications for geography education. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 141–164). London: Continuum. Firth, R. (2011b). Making geography visible as an object of study in the secondary school curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 22(3), 289–316. Firth, R. (2013). Why epistemology matters. Primary Geography, 82(Autumn), 14–15. Firth, R. (2015). Constructing geographical knowledge. In G. Butt (Ed.), MasterClass in geography education (pp. 53–66). London: Bloomsbury.

70

S. Catling

Firth, R. (2018). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 275–286). Abingdon: Routledge. GA. (2009). A different view: A manifesto for the Geographical Association. Available at: www. geography.org.uk/GA-Manifesto-for-Geography GA (Geographical Association). (2011). The geography national curriculum: GA curriculum proposals and rationale. Available at: www.geography.org.uk/download/ga_gigcccurriculumproposals.pdf Golledge, R. (2002). The nature of geographic knowledge. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92(1), 1–14. Guile, D. (2018). Professional knowledge in the 21st century. In D. Guile, D. Lambert, & M. Reiss (Eds.), Sociology, curriculum studies and professional knowledge: New perspectives on the work of Michael Young (pp. 185–201). Abingdon: Routledge. Hetherington, S. (2019). What is epistemology? Cambridge: Polity Press. Holt-Jensen, A. (2018). Geography: Its history and concepts (5th ed.). London: Sage. Jackson, P. (2006). Thinking geographically. Geography, 91(3), 199–2004. Jazeel, T. (2019). Postcolonialism. Abingdon: Routledge. Johnston, R., & Sidaway, J. (2016). Geography and geographers: Anglo-American human geography since 1945 (7th ed.). Abingdon: Routledge. Lambert, D. (2019). Editorial: On the knotty question of ‘Recontextualising’ geography. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(4), 257–261. Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage. Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Abingdon: Routledge. Maude, A. (2018). Geography and powerful knowledge: A contribution to the debate. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 27(2), 179–190. Pike, S. (2016). Learning primary geography. Abingdon: Routledge. Rawding, C. (2013). Effective innovation in the secondary geography curriculum: A practical guide. Abingdon: Routledge. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 187–209. Scoffham, S., & Owens, P. (2017). Teaching primary geography. London: Bloomsbury. Stoltman, J., Lidstone, J., & Kidman, G. (2015). Powerful knowledge in geography: IRGEE editors interview Professor David Lambert, London Institute of Education. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(1), 1–5. Willy, T. (Ed.). (2019). Leading primary geography. Sheffield: Geographical Association. Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructionism to social realism in the sociology of education. London: Routledge. Young, M., & Muller, J. (2016). Curriculum and the specialization of knowledge: Studies in the sociology of education. Abingdon: Routledge. Young, M., Lambert, D., Roberts, C. & Roberts, M. (2014). Knowledge and the future school. London: Bloomsbury.

Chapter 6

A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers’ Professional Practice Grace Healy

6.1  Introduction In this chapter, the theme of recontextualising geography is explored in relation to disciplinary knowledge and geography teachers’ professional practice. This exploration is orientated towards the idea that disciplinary knowledge ought not be isolated from how it is developed and marshalled by geography teachers, because it is through teachers’ professional practice that disciplinary knowledge becomes part of students’ geographical education. The extent to which disciplinary knowledge becomes explicit to students may vary, but this aspect of geographical knowledge can be considered across all stage of education, including primary education (Catling, this volume). The attention given to the notion of powerful knowledge (Young, 2008) within the geography education community through the work of the GeoCapabilities projects has culminated more recently in a description of powerful disciplinary knowledge (PDK) by Lambert (2016). Whilst this description is of much value to providing an all-encompassing view of what makes for a powerful geographical education, I set out here to bound disciplinary knowledge more tightly, and to more closely examine an aspect of school geography that is acknowledged to be underdeveloped (Lambert & Solem, 2017). Within geography education, Maude (2016) has more specifically drawn out what might count as disciplinary knowledge within his typology of powerful geographical knowledge, by including: “know[ing] something of the ways knowledge is created, tested and evaluated within geography” (p.75). This is similar to Firth’s (2015) attention to the “epistemological awareness of the discipline [and therefore] the norms of knowledge production” (p.59). Related to this, G. Healy (*) UCL Institute of Education, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_6

71

72

G. Healy

Firth (2015) draws upon the distinction set out by Schwab (1978) and considers what he perceives as a blind spot in school geography. Schwab (1978) in his philosophical essay on the structure of the disciplines observes that both substantive knowledge and syntactic knowledge encompass different aspects of the knowledge found within an academic discipline, so together elicits a much broader definition, similar to that proposed by Lambert (2016). Clifford (2017) also expresses concern for the balance between substantive and syntactic knowledge from his perspective as an academic geographer and contends that without an understanding of “the evolving history of the subject…teaching geography will too often default to a lot of ‘knowing that’ at the expense of ‘knowing how’” (p.259). Therefore, in the working definition I use within this chapter, I equate disciplinary knowledge more explicitly with Schwab’s (1978) syntactic knowledge, which is concerned with “the rules of evidence and warrants of truth within the discipline, the nature of enquiry in the discipline, and how new knowledge is introduced and accepted in that community” (Rowland & Turner, 2008, p.92). This chapter will first address Huckle’s (2019) concern that powerful geographical knowledge is not fully underpinned by critical realism. Through this discussion, I will draw out the importance and implications of considering the epistemic relations of geographical knowledge for geography teachers’ curricular decision-­ making. The second part of the chapter will build the case for a more explicit theorisation of disciplinary knowledge, which attends to the interplay between the relations of teacher, student and content and more broadly to geography teachers’ professional practice.

6.2  Epistemic Relations of Knowledge Huckle (2019) questioned whether the concept of powerful geographical knowledge, as outlined by the GeoCapabilities project (Lambert et  al., 2015) remains ambiguous. Whilst powerful geographical knowledge takes account of the sociological strand of the theory, Huckle (2019) suggests it has neglected the philosophical strand and therefore is not fully underpinned by critical realism. This appears particularly important in the context of concern that aspects of disciplinary knowledge remain under-theorised and neglected in the recontextualisation of geography (Firth, 2015; Lambert & Solem, 2017). In order to talk about the epistemic relations between knowledge and object, Wheelahan (2010) highlights that we need to engage with the methods used to study the object and that this plays a role in how the curriculum is structured. Though this is contested, if we return to Bernstein’s (2000) work and the notion of the pedagogic device, he argues that the pedagogical communication of knowledge does not derive its structure from the production field. Though others, such as Wheelahan (2010) and Maton (2014), have suggested this is because Bernstein (1996, 2000) under-­ theorises the epistemic relations of knowledge.

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

73

Huckle (2019) highlights that critical realism suggests that the geography curriculum needs to acknowledge depth ontology “by encouraging forms of understanding that relate experience and events to underlying structures, and mechanisms” (p.80). My suggestion would be that when subscribing to the notion of powerful knowledge within geography education, then one would have a commitment to Bhaskar’s depth ontology because this is about enabling students to go beyond their everyday experience and yet also about enabling student to view their everyday experience through a geographical lens (Wheelahan, 2010). In order to engage with social realism fully, we need to induct students into the systems of meaning that are underpinned by the epistemic relations of knowledge (Wheelahan, 2010). For without such systems of meaning, there is a lack of ontological depth as knowledge learnt is divorced from its structure and this then hinders the ways in which it can enable students to see the world through a geographical lens. As Firth (2011a) says, “geography teachers need to engage with questions about the production and nature of knowledge if they are to enable their students to make sense of how geography helps them make sense of the world” (p.154). From the outset, Huckle (2019) proposes that we need to turn to the work of critical academic geographers, as this is where we can find both powerful and empowering geographical knowledge. At this point, I would question the main thrust of Huckle’s (2019) argument, which is based upon the premise that it is possible and necessary to distinguish between mainstream and critical geographers and their resulting scholarship. Whilst it is possible to acknowledge that geographers work with a range of different underpinning philosophies (Whatmore, 2002), it is not necessarily the case that these can be used to distinguish between mainstream and critical geographers, as both sets of geographers can draw upon the same underpinning philosophies. Huckle (2019) draws on Blomley’s (2006) explication of the characteristics of critical geography but does not acknowledge that Blomley also problematises the nature and quality of scholarship in critical geography by raising questions about “how critical geography is both critical and geographic” (p.93, emphasis in the original). Critical geography is something that is itself in flux in academic geography. Lave et al.’s (2014) seminal paper on critical physical geography (CPG) provides a helpful illustration of how critical geography is still maturing within the sub-disciplines of geography. The authors use this new term (CPG) to represent the “integrative intellectual practice” (p.2) of geographers who “combine critical attention to the relations of social power with deep knowledge of a particular field of biophysical science or technology in the service of social and environmental transformation” (pp.1–2). This would seem to be compatible with characteristics of critical geography drawn upon by Huckle (2019), but with a more explicit emphasis on the integrative nature of any scholarship within this field (Lave et al., 2014). It appears that CPG research can integrate the work of geographers with substantively different philosophies (and epistemologies of knowledge) and cultivates a shift towards a research culture of epistemic pluralism (Castree, 2012). Lane (2019) has extended this point more recently when he proposed that “geography is uniquely placed for being anti-disciplinary, through the fluidity with which it can, if it so wishes, allow

74

G. Healy

the subjects of its studies to ‘speak back’ in determining how we study them” (p.52). This moves beyond the binary position proposed by Huckle (2019) and sets out a complex landscape of underpinning philosophies that geographers might be simultaneously working with. Whilst there appears to be much value in considering how critical geography can contribute to school geography, it would be problematic to dismiss other aspects of academic geography scholarship. Huckle (2019) places a necessary emphasis on drawing upon critical geographical scholarship (given that to date it has often been neglected), but I would suggest it is as important for teachers in their curriculum making, as “the curriculum comes in to being” (Lambert & Biddulph, 2015, p.215) within the classroom, to situate geographical scholarship that it is not characterised as critical geography, with sensitivity to its origin and context. Therefore, my proposal is that we need to better understand the role of disciplinary knowledge within geography teachers’ professional practice. In particular, it seems pertinent to understand the relationship between disciplinary knowledge and geography teachers’ subject expertise, and the role this might hold in their curriculum decision-making.

6.3  A  ttending to Disciplinary Knowledge in School Geography Alderson (2020) acknowledges more broadly that powerful knowledge theorists have disregarded “unseen social causal mechanisms when considering the social-­ political processes of how curricula are selected, promoted, taught, learned, applied and assessed” (p.29) and that critical realism works at the real level where “powerful influences and causal mechanisms that are only apprehended in their effects” (p.29) can be examined. Geographers, such as Finn (this volume) have problematised the hierarchical accounts of recontextualisation between the field of production and reproduction proposing that it is misleading to think that the practices of academic geographers are solely restricted to production. Sidaway (2000) drawing upon interviews with 40 academic geographers has been attentive to the contextual landscape (political, cultural and moral economy) that shapes how the discipline of geography is both produced and reproduced by academic geographers. It is necessary to acknowledge that the scope and focus of geographical scholarship is not merely governed by the norms of the discipline of geography, but by parameters of academic practice such as funding, publishing and labour markets, that ultimately lead to the commodification of academic geography (Sidaway, 2000; Sheppard, 2004; Bauder, 2006). Finn (this volume) also calls for the complexity of interactions perceived between different actors across both the pedagogical recontextualising field (PRF) and official recontextualising field (ORF) to be acknowledged, seeing this as more of a network, which is informed by how actor-network theory and assemblage theory is used to understand complexity in human geography. The perception here being, that it is problematic to place the discipline of geography upon

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

75

a pedestal if there is not sufficient attention to both the epistemic and social relations of the geographical knowledge in question. In geography, an example of how recontextualising requires attention across the boundaries of space and time can be seen through the case of migration presented by Béneker (2019). When considering how international migration is taught in five countries involved in phase three of the GeoCapabilities project, Béneker (2019) illustrates the disconnect and tensions between how migration is articulated by scholars versus its representation in school geography (Table  6.1). The phenomenon of migration appears to be framed in school geography as static, focussed on the perspective of the receiving country and viewing the migrant population as poor (Béneker, 2019). Source: Béneker (2019) Geography teachers have much to benefit from if they are able appreciate geography as an ever-evolving disciplinary resource (Lambert and Walshe 2018). At the Royal Geographical Society with IBG 2018 annual conference, academic geographers explored how landscapes are being changed and reproduced by the sustainable development agenda, as well as the power relations at play between different actors involved (Atkins, 2018; Banks, 2018; Hope, 2018; Frederiksen, 2018). Hope’s (2018) research considers how the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) encounter conflicts around energy mega projects and how non-governmental organisations work with social movements shaped by this context in Bolivia. This research foregrounds contested interpretations of the SDGs and draws out multiple (and differing) ideas about what ‘sustainable development’ means and requires (Hope, 2018). This guided me to think about how geography teachers ought to “enable students to see how the SDGs are enacted, who the stakeholders are, and how this is all mediated within the context of specific places and projects” (Healy, 2018). This appears to foreground how the epistemic relations of knowledge might be drawn upon by geography teachers to shape their curriculum thinking, and exemplifies how students can be enabled to understand the distinctive types of questions geographers are asking, as well as how geographers are making claims in their research. Extending this line of thinking, Bustin (2017) has examined the ‘capability approach’ to geography, and in doing so explores the extent to which GeoCapabilities provides a way for teachers to conceptualise geography curricula: The ‘discipline’ of geography is thus able to encompass a variety of methodologies, across a range of other discipline areas. Therefore the ‘social realist’ nature of geography, and what binds the discipline together relates much more to the content of the knowledge, what Table 6.1  International migration in academic and school geography Scholarly knowledge Context: globalisation, technology Phenomenon: non static, part of life, trajectories Home/city making, migrant agency, identities, superdiversity Representation of migrants

Taught knowledge Origin and destination Push and pull model EU policies Mexican-US Border Forced migration Migrants in society

76

G. Healy is being generated rather than a focus on how it is being generated. Whether working with the sciences of physical geography or sociological approaches of human geography, what is being researched defines geography more than how it has been researched. (Bustin, 2017, p.89, my emphasis)

Bustin (2017) suggests that what binds the discipline of geography relates more to the “what” than the “how”. This certainly highlights the particular complexities in the recontextualisation of disciplinary knowledge and illuminates why there might be a reason to downplay the epistemic relations of knowledge. Yet, Firth (2011b) takes a different approach to dealing with the complexity of the nature of geography and appears to welcome “engaged pluralism” where “knowledge about the world is more reliable when all the various approaches are placed in rigorous engagement with one another” (Firth 2011b, p.298). But if we look at Bustin’s (2011a, b) curricular thinking, as illuminated in his Teaching Geography and Geography articles, we can see that he is ‘recontextualising’ ideas from academic geography such as Soja’s (1996) ‘thirdspace’ for school geography. This appears to move beyond the ‘what’, as there is consideration of how this concept is used in academic geography and how it had potential within school geography to enable his students “to approach urban social issues from the lived experience of disadvantaged communities” (Bustin, 2011b, p.68). As part of Roberts’ (2014) critique of powerful knowledge in the context of geography education, she emphasises the importance of the ‘how’ geographers are studying cities and the significance of recognising the context in which this geographical knowledge is produced. Roberts (2014, p.197) sets out four supporting examples: Dorling uses quantitative data to examine inequalities, how they are distributed and reproduced, both nationally and in particular cities, e.g. London (Hennig & Dorling, 2013). Bradford’s studies of Manchester (Bradford, 2003) have focused on the economic and political contexts in which changes have taken place within the city. Massey (1994, 2007) has studied the interrelationships within and between places and argues that cities can be understood only in the economic, cultural and political global networks within which they are embedded. Wills et al. (2010) has used personal accounts from interviews to focus on migrant workers’ experiences of working in London.

Roberts (2014) uses these examples to exemplify that geographers’ scholarship and the questions they pursue is shaped by the contexts they live and work within. She also draws upon the scholarship of urban geographers (Pain, 2001; Skelton & Valentine, 1997) to highlight that geographical knowledge is also positioned in relation to the particular groups that it might focus on (e.g. young people, different ethnics groups). There appears to be an emphasis on how geography teachers must navigate their representation of the world within their teaching. Vernon (2017) through research, with A-level geography students, outlines the potential for teachers to better develop the student, as a knower through engaging with academic texts and proposes that this can “develop [students’] comprehension of, appreciation for and capacity to see (and reason) with different geographical lenses” (p.73,  emphasis in original). Vernon’s (2017) suggestion foregrounds the need to understand the relationship students hold to different subjects (Charlot,

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

77

2012) and exemplifies why we might consider shifting from a focus on knowledge to knowing as a contextualised relation (Carlgren, 2005 cited in Hudson, 2016) within geography classrooms. These vignettes help to illuminate that it is through attention to the disciplinary dimension of knowledge, that students appear to have been enabled to appreciate geographical knowledge as a product of social activity (Young, 2008). Disciplinary knowledge allows teachers and students to grasp that the practices of geographers have evolved over time, such that both the methods and foci of geographical study have changed (Gregory & Lewin, 2018), and therefore produce interpretations that “differ from different vantage points in time and space” (Daniels et al., 2012, p.2).

6.4  A  Peculiarity of Recontextualisation for Concepts Beyond the Discipline of Geography Within school geography, one of the peculiarities of recontextualisation is the role of concepts that are borrowed from other disciplines and drawn upon in academic and school geography. Hordern (2019) has responded to White’s (2018) critique of powerful knowledge where disciplines or subjects appear not to be built around their own “system of interrelated concepts” (p.326): a more nuanced interpretation could be advanced, suggesting that concepts in any given discipline or subject (for example, geography) could potentially have some origin in another discipline or subject (for example, sociology or economics) but that these concepts have been delocated from their original disciplinary context and relocated (Bernstein, 2000) in the new disciplinary context while undergoing some transformation to fit the conceptual schema of the receiving discipline (Hordern, 2019, p.28).

This interpretation would seem to be important because of the scope of the academic discipline of geography, and because within school geography teachers routinely draw upon ideas that originate from other disciplines. Yet it also foregrounds the need to consider the role of disciplinary knowledge and geography teachers’ subject expertise, given that this will most likely mediate how such concepts are represented within school geography.

6.5  T  he Interplay of Relations Between Teacher, Student and Content Both Hudson (2018) and Lambert (2018) have emphasised that subject didactics might provide a valuable framework to draw upon for research that brings into focus knowledge, teaching and the curriculum. Using the framework of subject didactics, Healy, Walshe and Dunphy (2020) have demonstrated the value of this through their exploration of how geography is rendered visible through written lesson

78

G. Healy

observation feedback. Hudson (2018) draws out the similarities between subject didactics and curriculum making, suggesting that they both illustrate that teachers must hold in mind “the trinity of education practice” (Lambert & Biddulph 2015, p.217) and bring curriculum and pedagogy together in the site of a classroom. Figure 6.1 shows how Lambert and Biddulph (2015) outline three sources of energy that form part of curriculum making and thus, determine the curriculum that students experience in the classroom. It is important to emphasise that these approaches come from different traditions. The tradition of geography curriculum making and Young’s (2008) principle of powerful knowledge are all contextualised within the Anglo-American tradition of curriculum. Whereas, subject didactics originate from different traditions of German, Nordic and French didactics (Westbury et al., 2000). There have been several efforts to bring the Anglo-American tradition of curriculum into conversation with the different traditions of didactics (e.g. Westbury et  al., 2000; Uljens & Ylimaki, 2015; Hudson, 2016). This is significant because any conversation that tries to bring together these approaches and concepts needs to fully recognise the tensions that exist between these traditions due to their differing starting points as acknowledged by Westbury (2000). In particular, there is a sense that both traditions characterise what it means to be a teacher and the professional practice of subject-specialist teaching in different ways.

Fig. 6.1  Three pillars of curriculum making after Lambert and Morgan (2010). (Source: Lambert & Biddulph, 2015, p.215, The original source of publication and Taylor & Francis Ltd., are acknowledged in the caption, including a reference to the Journal’s web site: Taylor & Francis Ltd, http://www.tandfonline.com)

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

79

The didactic triangle within subject didactics positions the teacher at the heart of the process of curriculum enactment, whereby it provides a tool for analysing the relationships between teacher, student and content (Hudson, 2007, 2016), as illustrated in Fig. 6.2. In particular, the didactic relation illustrates the set of relationship that teachers must hold at the core of their professional practice (Hudson, 2007). Hudson (2007) proposes that due to the complexity of these relations within a particular context, it is clear that teachers’ own practical theorising and pedagogical thinking is of importance. It provides a useful framework to examine “teachers’ thinking about the most basic how, what and why questions around their work” (Hudson, 2007, p.140), which would be important to seek in examining how disciplinary knowledge manifests within teachers’ professional practice. The importance of Klafki’s (2000) concept of didactic analysis for both professional practice and educational research has been emphasised by Hudson (2002, 2003). Several recent reflections of the value of didactics within subject-specialist teaching (e.g. Hudson, 2016; Bladh et al., 2018; Deng, 2018; Gericke et al., 2018)

CONTENT

Fig. 6.2  The pedagogical relation and the didactic relation within the didactic triangle. (Source: Hudson, 2016, p.112)

TEACHER

pedagogical relation STUDENT TEACHER

CONTENT

didactic relation

STUDENT

80

G. Healy

have introduced the questions posed by Klafki (2000) and stressed the importance of examining these from an interpretative rather than technical stance (Hudson, 2016): 1. What wider or general sense or reality do these contents exemplify and open up for the learner? What basic phenomenon or fundamental principle, what law, criterion, problem, method, technique or attitude can be grasped by dealing with this content as an ‘example’? 2. What significance does the content in question or the experience, knowledge, ability or skill to be acquired through this topic already possess in the minds of the children in my class? What significance should it have from a pedagogical point of view? 3. What constitutes the topic’s significance for the children’s future? 4. How is the content structured (which has been placed into a specifically pedagogical perspective by questions 1, 2 and 3)? 5. What are the special cases, phenomena, situations, experiments, persons, elements of aesthetic experience, and so forth, in terms of which the structure of the content in question can become interesting, stimulating, approachable, conceivable, or vivid for children of the stage of development of this class? (Klafki, 2000, pp.152–155)

The questions are future-orientated, and address Deng’s (2018) and White’s (2019) concerns that within powerful knowledge discourse there has been a lack of consideration for the role knowledge plays within and for students’ education. The questions also provide a means to respond to the call by Rata (2016) for a pedagogy of conceptual progression, whereby teachers need to be knowledgeable about the structure and systems of meaning of their subject and their significance for their students’ understanding. Additionally, these questions engage with the development of meaning-making in the context of student learning, which has been illuminated by Derry (2014) through her work with Brandom’s inferentialism. The hermeneutic orientation of didactic analysis emphasises that teachers will interpret and make sense of disciplinary knowledge for themselves. Kansanen (2009) suggests within didactics teachers function in relation to the discipline, so illuminating the importance of the relationship between disciplinary knowledge and teachers’ professional practice.

6.6  Teachers’ Professional Practice Exploring disciplinary knowledge ought not to be isolated from examining how it is developed and marshalled by teachers in their teaching of geography, because it is through teachers’ professional practice that disciplinary knowledge becomes part of students’ geographical education. In particular, as suggested by Firth (2017) it is necessary to examine curriculum and pedagogy “as a space of interaction between the different epistemic communities (discipline, teacher, student)” (Firth, 2017, p.286, emphasis in original). Among the difference facets of the relationship between disciplinary knowledge and teachers’ professional practice, consideration is needed for: teachers’ subject knowledge, the relationship that holds between the school subject and academic discipline of geography, the interaction between the

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

81

epistemic communities (discipline, teacher, subject) and the role of subject scholarship. Teachers’ subject knowledge will be partly shaped by their experience of the discipline of geography through their own university education. Mitchell and Lambert (2015) suggest that the “increasingly fragmented research-focused university discipline...produces geography graduates with varied and unpredictable conceptions of what constitutes geographical knowledge” (p.372). In support of this observation, Standish (2017) asserts that based on his experience of interviewing prospective geography teachers that many geographers appear to lack a conception of their discipline. Puttick (2018) found the differences between individual teachers’ descriptions of the nature of geographical knowledge was significant, and in many cases appeared to relate to their experiences of undergraduate geography. These findings suggest that it is necessary to anticipate that teachers will have differing interpretations of disciplinary knowledge. Furthermore, it has been found that the way in which teachers draw upon their subject expertise can guide their professional practice (Brooks, 2009, 2016). Brooks (2009) draws upon the term of synoptic capacity to explicate how teachers’ subject expertise can enable connections to be made between the subject content and students, and how that subject content can be located within the subject as a whole. It is this “ability to draw strands of a field together in a way that provides both coherence and meaning to place what is known in context and opens the way for connections between the knower and the known” (Rice, 1992, p.125) that is referred to as synoptic capacity. Brooks (2007) proposes that this is also about the ability to “appreciate what the ‘big stories’ of a subject discipline are” (p.311). This serves to illustrate the importance not just of subject knowledge in and of itself, but of its significance when marshalled in particular ways by teachers in their professional practice. The notion of disciplinary knowledge can also be problematised for it is acknowledged that a gap has long existed between academic and school geography (Butt & Collins, 2017). The priorities and purposes of school and academic geography are different (Butt and Collins 2017) and, although there is a view that their aims should be complementary (Brooks et al., 2017) examining the relationship between the two is important. Brooks (2017) drawing upon Stengel (1997) contends that the relationship between the two is dependent upon: “the relative focus on academic, pedagogical, utilitarian and existential concerns; the extent to which the moral is allowed and encouraged; and the underlying view of knowledge” (Brooks, 2017, p.170). As such a focus on the professional practice of geography teachers becomes fruitful because teachers are “at the central point of interpreting all these influences and are subject to the combination of influences” (Brooks 2017, p.170). Geography teachers play a significant role in recontextualisation if they take ownership over curriculum making (Lambert & Morgan, 2010). This is particularly significant given that Puttick’s (2015) research illuminates the substantial power that chief examiners hold over the recontextualising of geographical knowledge, such that it can “prevent engagement with disciplinary understandings and revisions of knowledge” (p.485) within school geography. Though knowledge marginalised from curricula by the official

82

G. Healy

recontextualising field (ORF) is not necessarily neglected by geography teachers for Bernstein (1996) suggest that there is a discursive gap operating within the recontextualising process, whereby there is “a site for alternative possibilities…the site for the unthinkable, the site for the impossible” (p.30). In the context of music education, Wright and Froehlich (2012) suggest that the discursive gap is where teachers should be encouraged to work to address the gap between the thinkable and unthinkable knowledge. Therefore, teachers’ professional practice becomes a way of exploring disciplinary knowledge that takes account of the many levels at which the school subject is socially constructed (Brooks, 2017; Rawling, 2018). In relation to disciplinary knowledge, Firth (2015) draws upon the concept of disciplined judgement, which “describes the application of criteria that emerge from the institutional context of each discipline to judge the worth of knowledge constructions” (Stemhagen et  al., 2013, p.58). This emphasises how disciplinary knowledge is not something that can be identified and justified in a vacuum but exists through the interpretation and justification of this knowledge by stakeholders in education. In particular, within the context of teachers’ professional practice, it is necessary to examine the tensions and mediation needed between “disciplinary modes of thought” (Stemhagen et  al., 2013, p.58) and students’ construction of geographical knowledge (Firth, 2015). Subject scholarship plays a role in nourishing the professional practice of teachers through “deepening and extending professional repertoires of thought and practice to do within teachers’ interpretation and enactment of the curriculum” (Lambert, 2018, p.368). Such scholarship emphasises the significance of a geographical education (Lambert, 2002), and can provide space for a “continuous ‘recontextualizing’ of the discipline” (Counsell, 2016, p.246) whereby professional practice involves theorising or engagement with others’ theorising around disciplinary knowledge. Brooks (2015) suggests that reading research can challenge teachers and allow them to develop their professional knowledge, which illustrates how engaging with subject scholarship in the field of geography education might form part of teachers’ professional practice. Sachs (2016) places much emphasis on the professional learning enabled through teachers engaging with classroom research. Professional learning literature highlights the need to take into consideration the beliefs and values of teachers rather than assuming knowledge gained through professional learning will in itself have an impact on professional practice (Timperley et al., 2007). This suggests that it is necessary to carefully consider how initial teacher education (ITE) and continued professional development influences how teachers interpret and draw upon disciplinary knowledge. ITE provides opportunity for teachers to be inducted into the repertoire of experience and theories that exist within the field of geography education (Brooks, 2018). Debates and critiques around these repertoires provide a context to how disciplinary knowledge might be interpreted or drawn upon in teachers’ professional practice. This section of the chapter has illustrated that there are already significant contributions within the field of geography education that bring together a focus upon subject expertise and geographical knowledge in the context of teachers’ professional practice (e.g. Brooks, 2007; Puttick, 2015; Brooks, 2016; Mitchell, 2017;

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

83

Lambert, 2018). Brooks (2007) early on in her consideration of subject expertise posed several questions: “Can a human geographer (with limited experience in some aspects of physical geography) lay claim to being an expert geographer? Can a teacher be an expert in all aspects of geography?” (p.18). This connects to how subject knowledge is conceptualised. More recently, Puttick (2018) has argued that teachers (including trainees) were often positioned as either knowing or not-­ knowing subject knowledge. This dichotomy was problematised in relation to trainee development and also how it conceals any questioning or critical engagement around the substance of the geography. Therefore, it appears necessary to engage with the complexity of the mechanism by which teachers have agency to sustain and nourish their own subject expertise throughout their career, especially in relation to disciplinary knowledge.

6.7  Conclusion The facets drawn out in this chapter emphasise that it would be fruitful for future research on disciplinary knowledge to be situated within the context of geography teachers’ professional practice. This would allow for greater consideration around teachers’ disciplinary knowledge, as an aspect of subject expertise that remains in motion throughout their career and evolves with their engagement with the geography education community and the discipline of geography. It also could be beneficial to consider a shift from viewing knowledge, as substance, to knowing, as a contextualised relation (Carlgren, 2005 cited in Hudson, 2016) when considering how the disciplinary dimensions of geographical knowledge will be navigated by teachers in their curriculum making for their students. Alderson (2020) has emphasised that as critical realism attends to ontology, it foregrounds the “being and doing of actual schools, and teachers’ and students’ interactions with one another, with the curricula, and with the social and natural and everyday contexts and structures around them” (Alderson, 2020, p.29). This shift to examining the ‘being and doing’ of geography teachers in relation to disciplinary knowledge, is about a call to view disciplinary knowledge through the lens of geography teachers’ professional practice. This moves beyond the descriptions by Lambert (2016) and Maude (2016) that have been fruitful in developing a normative account of the importance of geographical knowledge, and opens up space for a descriptive account of teachers’ curriculum work in their geography classrooms that engages with the reality of local and national contexts that both enable and constrain their professional work as geography teachers. Brooks’ (2007, 2016) narrative research has provided a compelling case for the subject-specific nature of professional knowledge and the extent to which subject expertise can guide geography teachers’ professional practice in and beyond the classroom. Here, I conclude that an explicit focus on the disciplinary dimensions of geographical knowledge would allow greater insight into this neglected aspect of teachers’ subject expertise. In seeking quality in scope and rigour of geography

84

G. Healy

curricula, it seems disciplinary knowledge might hold a key to understanding how geography teachers are guided both by the authenticity and rigour of their discipline and subject. Without greater attention to the role of disciplinary knowledge within geography teachers’ curricular decision-making, there remains a danger that generic sources of authority on curriculum might reduce teaching quality in geography by denying students the capacity to appreciate geographical knowledge as a product of social activity bound by time and space. Ultimately, geography education research that views disciplinary knowledge through the lens of geography teachers’ professional practice could serve as a foundation to cultivate connections between the research and practice of academic geographers and geography teachers (Butt, 2020).

References Alderson, P. (2020). Powerful knowledge and the curriculum: Contradictions and dichotomies. British Educational Research Journal, 46(1), 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3570 Atkins, E. (2018, August 28–31). (Re)Articulating sustainable development: Defining “Sustainable and modern energy for all”. Paper presented at RGS-IBG Annual International Conference, Cardiff. Banks, G. (2018, August 28–31). Shaping the contours of sustainability: Mining sector sustainability discourse and practices. Paper presented at RGS-IBG Annual International Conference, Cardiff. Bauder, H. (2006). Learning to become a geographer: Reproduction and transformation in academia. Antipode, 38(4), 671–679. Béneker, T. (2019, April 15–17). Recontextualising migration as a theme in Geography Education, in the context of the GeoCapabilities 3 project. Paper presented at IGU-CGE UCL Institute of Education Geography Education Conference, London. Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique. Taylor Francis. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (No. 4). Rowman & Littlefield. Bladh, G., Stolare, M., & Kristiansson, M. (2018). Curriculum principles, didactic practice and social issues: Thinking through teachers’ knowledge practices in collaborative work. London Review of Education, 16(3), 398–413. Blomley, N. (2006). Uncritical critical geography? Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 87–94. Bradford, M. (2003). Regenerating the city and the discipline. Geography, 88, 15–22. Brooks, C. (2007). Towards understanding the influence of subject knowledge in the practice of ‘expert’ geography teachers. PhD thesis. Institute of Education, University of London. Brooks, C. (2009). Developing and reflecting on subject expertise. In C. Brooks (Ed.), Studying PGCE geography to M level (pp. 66–76). Routledge. Brooks, C. (2015). Research and professional practice. In G. Butt & S. Brindley (Eds.), MasterClass in geography education: Transforming teaching and learning (pp.  31–44). Bloomsbury Publishing. Brooks, C. (2016). Teacher subject identity in professional practice: Teaching with a professional compass. Routledge. Brooks, C. (2017). International differences in thinking geographically, and why ‘the local’ matters. In C.  Brooks, G.  Butt, & M.  Fargher (Eds.), The power of geographical thinking (pp. 169–180). Springer.

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

85

Brooks, C. (2018). Insights on the field of geography education from a review of master’s level practitioner research. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 27(1), 5–23. Brooks, C., Butt, G., & Fargher, M. (2017). The power of geographical thinking. Springer. Bustin, R. (2011a). Thirdspace: Exploring the ‘lived space’ of cultural ‘others’. Teaching Geography, 36(2), 55–57. Bustin, R. (2011b). The living city: Thirdspace and the contemporary geography curriculum. Geography, 96(2), 60–68. Bustin, R. (2017). An investigation into geocapability and future 3 curriculum thinking in geography. PhD thesis. University College London. Butt, G. (2020). Geography education research in the UK: Retrospect and Prospect: The UK case, within the global context. Springer. Butt, G., & Collins, G. (2017). Understanding the gap between school and universities. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 263–274). Routledge. Carlgren, I. (2005, September 5–10). The content of schooling  – From knowledge and subject matter to knowledge formation and subject specific ways of knowing. Paper presented at ECER 2005 — European Conference on Educational Research, University College Dublin. Castree, N. (2012). Progressing physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography, 36(3), 298–304. Catling, S. (this volume). Reflecting on knowledge and primary geography. In M.  Fargher, D. Mitchell, & E. Till (Eds.), Recontextualising geography in education. Springer. Charlot, B. (2012). School and pupils’ work. In H. Lauder, M. Young, H. Daniels, M. Balarin, & J. Lowe (Eds.), Education for the knowledge economy? Critical perspectives (pp. 211–224). Routledge. Clifford, N. (2017). Geography’s identity as an academic discipline. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 250–262). Routledge. Counsell, C. (2016). History teacher publication and the curricular ‘what?’: Mobilizing subject-­ specific professional knowledge in a culture of genericism. In C.  Counsell, K.  Burn, & A. Chapman (Eds.), MasterClass in history education (pp. 243–252). Bloomsbury Publishing. Daniels, P., Sidaway, J., Bradshore, M., & Shaw, D. (2012). An introduction to human geography. Pearson Education. Deng, Z. (2018). Rethinking teaching and teachers: Bringing content back into conversation. London Review of Education, 16(3), 371–383. Derry, J. (2014). Abstract rationality in education: From Vygotsky to Brandom. In M. Young & J. Muller (Eds.), Knowledge, expertise and the professions (pp. 33–46). Routledge. Finn, M. (this volume). Questioning recontextualisation: Considering recontextualisation’s geographies. In M. Fargher, D. Mitchell, & E. Till (Eds.), Recontextualising geography in education. Springer. Firth, R. (2011a). Debates about knowledge and the curriculum: Some implications for geography education. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 141–164). Continuum. Firth, R. (2011b). Making geography visible as an object of study in the secondary school curriculum. Curriculum Journal, 22(3), 289–316. Firth, R. (2015). Constructing geographical knowledge. In G.  Butt & S.  Brindley (Eds.), MasterClass in geography education: Transforming teaching and learning (pp.  53–66). Bloomsbury Publishing. Firth, R. (2017). Recontexualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 275–286). Routledge. Frederiksen, T. (2018, August 28–31). Sustainable development, risk and responsibility in the mining industry. Paper presented at RGS-IBG Annual International Conference, Cardiff. Gericke, N., Hudson, B., Olin-Scheller, C., & Stolare, M. (2018). Powerful knowledge, transformations and the need for empirical studies across school subjects. London Review of Education, 16(3), 428–444.

86

G. Healy

Gregory, K. J., & Lewin, J. (2018). A hierarchical framework for concepts in physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 42(6), 721–738. Healy, G. (2018). Taking (geography) curriculum seriously. Royal Geographical Society (Ideas for Teachers).  Available at: https://www.rgs.org/geography/news/ taking-­(geography)-­curriculum-­seriously-­–-­subject Healy, G., Walshe, N., & Dunphy, A. (2020). How is geography rendered visible as an object of concern in written lesson observation feedback? Curriculum Journal, 31(1), 7–26. https://doi. org/10.1002/curj.1 Hennig, B., & Dorling, D. (2013). Inequalities in London. Trust for London Hope, J. (2018, August 28–31). The sustainable development goals as assemblage: Disrupting the status quo. Paper presented at RGS-IBG Annual International Conference, Cardiff. Hordern, J. (2019). Exercise and intervention: On the sociology of powerful knowledge. London Review of Education, 17(1), 26–37. Huckle, J. (2019). Powerful geographical knowledge is critical knowledge underpinned by critical realism. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(1), 70–84. Hudson, B. (2002). Holding complexity and searching for meaning: Teaching as reflective practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 43–57. Hudson, B. (2003). Approaching educational research from the tradition of critical-constructive Didaktik. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 11(2), 173–187. Hudson, B. (2007). Comparing different traditions of teaching and learning: What can we learn about teaching and learning? European Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 135–146. Hudson, B. (2016). Didactics. In D. Wyse, L. Hayward, & J. Pandya (Eds.), The sage handbook of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (pp. 107–124). Sage. Hudson, B. (2018). Powerful knowledge and epistemic quality in school mathematics. London Review of Education, 16(3), 384–397. Kansanen, P. (2009). Subject-matter didactics as a central knowledge base for teachers, or should it be called pedagogical content knowledge? Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 17(1), 29–39. Klafki, W. (2000). Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation. In I.  Westbury, S.  Hopmann, & K.  Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139–159). Routledge. Lambert, D. (2002). Teaching through a lens: The role of subject expertise in the teaching of geography. In V. Cheng, K. Tsui, K. Chow, & M. Mok (Eds.), Subject teaching and teacher education in the new century: Research and innovation (pp. 349–368). Kluwer Academic Publishers. Lambert, D. (2016). Geography. In D. Wyse, L. Hayward, & J. Pandya (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment (pp. 391–407). Sage. Lambert, D. (2018). Teaching as a research-engaged profession: Uncovering a blind spot and revealing new possibilities. London Review of Education, 16(3), 357–370. Lambert, D., & Biddulph, M. (2015). The dialogic space offered by curriculum-making in the process of learning to teach, and the creation of a progressive knowledge-led curriculum. Asia-­ Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 210–224. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2010). Teaching geography 11–18: A conceptual approach: A conceptual approach. McGraw-Hill Education. Lambert, D., & Solem, M. (2017). Rediscovering the teaching of geography with the focus on quality. Geographical Education, 30, 8–15. Lambert, D., & Walshe, N. (2018). How geography curricula tackle global issues. In Geography education for global understanding (pp. 83–96). Springer. Lambert, D., Solem, M., & Tani, S. (2015). Achieving human potential through geography education: A capabilities approach to curriculum making in schools. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(4), 723–735. Lane, S. (2019). Critical physical geography. Geography, 104(1), 48–53. Lave, R., Wilson, M. W., Barron, E. S., Biermann, C., Carey, M. A., Duvall, C. S., Johnson, L., Lane, K. M., McClintock, N., Munroe, D., & Pain, R. (2014). Intervention: Critical physical geography. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 58(1), 1–10.

6  A Call to View Disciplinary Knowledge Through the Lens of Geography Teachers…

87

Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. University of Minnesota Press. Massey, D. (2007). World city. Polity Press Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge. Maude, A. (2016). What might powerful geographical knowledge look like? Geography, 101(2), 70–76. Mitchell, D. (2017). Geography curriculum making in changing times. PhD thesis. University College London. Mitchell, D., & Lambert, D. (2015). Subject knowledge and teacher preparation in English secondary schools: The case of geography. Teacher Development, 19(3), 365–380. Pain, R. (2001). Gender, race, age and fear in the city. Urban Studies, 38, 899–913. Puttick, S. (2015). Chief examiners as prophet and priest: Relations between examination boards and school subjects, and possible implications for knowledge. The Curriculum Journal, 26(3), 468–487. Puttick, S. (2018). Student teachers’ positionalities as knowers in school subject departments. British Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 25–42. Rata, E. (2016). A pedagogy of conceptual progression and the case for academic knowledge. British Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 168–184. Rawling, E. (2018). Reflections on ‘place’. Teaching Geography, 43(2), 55–58. Rice, R.  E. (1992). Towards a broader conception of scholarship: The American context. In T. Whiston & R. Geiger (Eds.), Research and higher education: The United Kingdom and the United States. SRHE/Open University. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 187–209. Rowland, T., & Turner, F. (2008). How shall we talk about ‘subject knowledge’ for mathematics teaching. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 28(2), 91–96. Sachs, J. (2016). Teacher professionalism: Why are we still talking about it? Teachers and Teaching, 22(4), 413–425. Schwab, J. J. (1978). Education and the structure of the disciplines. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science curriculum and liberal education (pp. 229–273). University of Chicago Press. Sheppard, E. (2004). Practicing geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94(4), 744–747. Sidaway, J. D. (2000). Recontextualising positionality: Geographical research and academic fields of power. Antipode, 32(3), 260–270. Skelton, T., & Valentine, G. (1997). Cool places: Geographies of youth cultures. Routledge. Soja, E. (1996). Thirdspace. Blackwell. Standish, A. (2017). Geography. In A.  Sehgal Cuthbert & A.  Standish (Eds.), What should schools teach? Disciplines, subjects, and the pursuit of truth (pp. 88–103). UCL Institute of Education Press. Stemhagen, K., Reich, G.  A., & Muth, W. (2013). Disciplined judgment: Toward a reasonably constrained constructivism. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 10(1), 55–72. Stengel, S. (1997). ‘Academic discipline’ and ‘school subject’: Contestable curricular concepts. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 29(5), 585–602. Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Ministry of Education. Uljens, M., & Ylimaki, R. (2015). Towards a discursive and non-affirmative framework for curriculum studies, Didaktik and educational leadership. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 3, 30–43. Vernon, E. (2017). Attempting to navigate a ‘discursive gap’: A case study investigating the nature of geographical knowledge in the new A level changing places topic. Unpublished MEd thesis. University of Cambridge.

88

G. Healy

Westbury, I. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: What might Didaktik teach curriculum. In I. Westbury, S. Hopmann, & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 15–39). Routledge. Westbury, I., Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (2000). Teaching as a reflective practice: The German Didaktik tradition. Routledge. Whatmore, S. (2002). Hybrid geographies: Natures cultures spaces. Sage. Wheelahan, L. (2010). Why knowledge matters in curriculum: A social realist argument. Routledge. White, J. (2018). The weakness of “powerful knowledge”. London Review of Education, 16(2), 325–335. White, J. (2019, May 1). The end of powerful knowledge. Paper presented at PESGB London Branch Philosophy of Education Research Seminar, London. Wills, J., Datta, K., Evans, Y., Herbert, J., May, J., & McIlwane, C. (2010). Global cities at work: New migrant divisions of labour. Pluto. Wright, R., & Froehlich, H. (2012). Basil Bernstein’s theory of the pedagogic device and formal music schooling: Putting the theory into practice. Theory Into Practice, 51(3), 212–220. Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge Back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Routledge.

Chapter 7

The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful Knowledge: A Study of Sixth Form Geography Students Daniel Whittall

7.1  I ntroduction: What Role Do Students Play in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful Knowledge? In pursuing an answer to this question, the chapter brings together work on young people’s geographies with recent educational work on inferentialism. It then proceeds to consider the implications of this work for attempts to analyse the didactical entanglement of students and teachers with the content of academic disciplines and recontextualised school subjects in particular classroom contexts. The chapter then uses a micro-study of a small group of pupils studying A Level Geography to begin to tentatively explore the applicability of research on the role of students in the recontextualisation and transformation of powerful knowledge. The chapter closes by posing some questions for further research that might sit at the heart of a reconsideration of the role of students in the recontextualisation of powerful knowledge. The fields of educational research, policy and practice are undoubtedly experiencing a renewed interest in questions of knowledge, and in the role of knowledge as an educational and curricular principle. Central to some of these discussions has been Michael Young’s idea of ‘powerful knowledge’. Young has suggested that powerful knowledge is knowledge that ‘provides reliable explanations or new ways of thinking about the world’ (Young, 2008: 150), that it ‘helps us go beyond our original experiences’ (Young, 2013: 196), and that powerful knowledge is that which ‘enables you to envisage alternatives’ (Young, 2014: 74). Powerful knowledge is subject-specific specialized knowledge that enables students to engage with

D. Whittall (*) Trinity Sixth Form Academy, Halifax, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_7

89

90

D. Whittall

and understand the world around them (Young, 2014: 72–75). Powerful knowledge is also generated in and through academic disciplines. However, from the perspective of classroom teachers, powerful knowledge must also necessarily be recontextualised knowledge. This idea of recontextualisation, derived from the work of Basil Bernstein (1990, 2000), is an essential aspect of any attempt to grasp the relationship between the knowledge taught through school subjects and the knowledge generated through disciplinary traditions of research and debate (Bernstein, 1990, 2000). This distinction is neatly captured by Clare Brooks who suggests, drawing on the work of Karl Maton (2014), that ‘the production of knowledge is distinctively different to the process of making such knowledge available to others who do not have access to it’ (Brooks, 2016: 52). It is the function of schools to take knowledge produced in disciplines and transmit it to young people who would otherwise not have access to it, and it is their role in this process of transmitting powerful disciplinary knowledge that renders schools ‘unique and special’ (Standish & Cuthbert, 2017a: xxi). Powerful geographical knowledge as taught in school classrooms, then, is not new knowledge independently produced by teachers but is instead knowledge that has been taken from the wider discipline of Geography and transformed into a school subject that is accessible to both teachers and students in classroom contexts. This process of ‘re-packaging’ the discipline into the subject (Standish & Cuthbert, 2017b: 14) occurs in complex ways – through things like national exam board specifications and published text book content as well as through the more localized acts of curriculum-making that constitute teachers as ‘agents of recontextualisation’. As Roger Firth (2018: 276) has argued, ‘how disciplinary knowledge is turned into recontextualised school knowledge, geography included, is central to any pedagogic theory that looks at curriculum and teaching and learning in the context of subject matter’. To date, much of the focus on the recontextualisation of knowledge from disciplines into school subjects and on the transmission of powerful knowledge has been on their role as curriculum principles, or on teacher’s own knowledge and expertise and their confidence or otherwise in identifying and engaging with the powerful knowledge of the subject they teach (Brooks, 2016; Brooks et al., 2017). However, the recontextualisation and transformation of knowledge occurs most directly and most regularly in specific classroom contexts, not just in textbooks, on curriculum planning documents and in conversations between teachers. Consequently, there is an often-ignored pedagogic element to the process of recontextualisation. This pedagogic context has been comparatively under-researched from the perspective of the recontextualisation of powerful geographical knowledge. Firth (2018: 283) argues that ‘how teachers and students understand the discipline - school subject - everyday knowledge relationship’ is highly significant. To date, however, research on the intersection between powerful knowledge and geography has left the second part of Firth’s framing, the students, comparatively underexplored. There remains relatively little research that explores the concept of powerful knowledge from the perspective of students, and especially from the perspective of 6th form students.

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

91

This chapter develops earlier research in this area (Whittall, 2019) and suggests that we can acquire a more rounded sense of powerful knowledge in geography classrooms, and of the ways in which geographical knowledge is transformed and recontextualised through educational encounters, if we begin to incorporate student perspectives on these issues into our research. The central research question at the heart of this chapter is as follows: What role do students play in the recontextualisation and transformation of powerful knowledge?

7.2  T  he Importance of Young People’s Perspectives on Knowledge Although research specifically exploring the intersection of powerful knowledge and student perspectives in Geography might be lacking, that is not to say that there has been no previous work in which student perspectives have been taken account of. Indeed, there has been a healthy growth over the years in work that has looked into student conceptions, and misconceptions, in geography (Lane & Coutts, 2015; Dove, 2014). A key influence for such work has been the research of Rosalind Driver into student conceptions of Science education. Driver has argued that ‘taking account of students’ prior ideas is one of the strategies … which enables teaching to be better adapted to students in terms of aspects such as the choice of concepts to teach and the choice of learning experiences provided (Driver et al., 1985: 6). Driver, Guesne and Tiberghien highlight the importance of appreciating that ‘students minds are not blank slates’, and that they ‘approach experiences acquired in science classrooms with previously acquired notions’. They suggest that these notions are often personal, potentially incoherent, and yet often remarkably stable in the minds of the children holding them, and that these pre-conceived notions in turn shape how knowledge is received by students in classroom contexts. Such research has clear implications for understanding the recontextualisation of knowledge in geography classrooms. For if students approach classrooms with their own preconceived notions around what geographical knowledge is, then it stands to reason that such understandings and conceptions will play a role in how they receive and transform such knowledge for themselves. A useful way to consider this can be to draw on what Roger Firth, mobilising the work of Paechter (1998), refers to as ‘owned knowledge’. The idea of owned knowledge is intended to symbolize the way in which school subject knowledge is combined with ‘non-school’ knowledge in the minds of students, and the role that this then plays in the recontextualisation of knowledge from the wider discipline of geography. As Firth argues, the role played by the owned knowledge of both students and teachers, and the way in which subject knowledge is differently assimilated into owned knowledge, are central reasons why ‘the school subject as taught and learned cannot be simply seen as a transformation of pre-existent disciplinary knowledge’ (Firth, 2018: 283).

92

D. Whittall

What Firth is suggesting here is that students themselves have a role to play in the recontextualisation of knowledge, and that their own ability to understand the role that they play in this process is central to the way in which they may or may not establish what he has elsewhere termed a ‘disposition towards knowledge’ (Firth, 2011). This chimes with Nick Hopwood’s argument for appreciating the fact that the ways in which students are ‘actively constructing their lives and ideas’ plays a key role in their engagement with knowledge in classrooms (Hopwood, 2011: 31). Across a significant body of work, Hopwood has assembled the most detailed analysis to date of how students understand geography as a subject and the knowledge that they are taught through it. He argues for ‘the need to pay attention to young people’s conceptions of geography and education’, and suggests that ‘each student has the capacity to interpret experiences in their own way and to construct their own sense of the subject and how it relates to their lives’ (Hopwood, 2011: 31, 32). Of course, this is not to suggest that students themselves directly recontextualise powerful disciplinary knowledge. Rather, the argument here is that students encounter subject knowledge that has already been recontextualised from the wider discipline by textbooks, teachers and other agents of recontextualisation, but that they do not encounter this recontextualised knowledge mutely. Instead, students come to an engagement with this knowledge with their own pre-conceptions about what geographical knowledge is and what geography as a school subject involves. It is on these terms that they then adapt this knowledge and assimilate it into their pre-­ existing knowledges, in the process transforming it once more. We could say that students enter into a didactic relationship with knowledge itself. Teachers, as agents of recontextualisation, become intermediaries who, through the pedagogic relationship they develop with the student, mediate, facilitate and direct key aspects of this didactic relationship. It is through these two channels that the school subject, constituting recontextualised disciplinary knowledge, comes to be made meaningful as part of the owned knowledge of the students. Of what does the didactic relationship between student and knowledge consist? Firth (2017) has suggested that one way of conceiving of this process is to consider how it is that students make meaning out of the content knowledge that they are taught. He proposes drawing on Robert Brandom’s theory of inferentialism for this purpose. Inferentialism is a theory that foregrounds the role of reasoning and meaning-­making in the acquisition, learning and understanding of concepts. The essence of the theory is that we understand concepts in terms of the inferential relations that we make between the concept we seek to understand and other concepts that we have already learned. One of Brandom’s most oft-quoted examples involves the concept of colour. How do we learn what red is? By coming to understand that red is one thing, but also that it is distinct from blue, green or yellow, and that all of these are different forms of the same concept – colour. Brandom contrasts this with a parrot, capable of saying the word red, perhaps even doing so in the presence of red objects, but not of understanding the references between the concepts involved, nor of giving reasons for its choice to use that word in that context. Brandom’s point is that the human knower doesn’t come to know the concept of ‘red’ in isolation, but in terms of the inferential relationships that are constructed between the concept we

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

93

seek to learn and pre-existing concepts that we have already grasped. As Firth (2017: 87) puts it, ‘our words and thoughts are accorded meaning in terms of their inferential connections, by being situated within a network of inferential relations’. The implications of this approach for our understanding of learning have been fleshed out by Catherine McCrory in the context of history education. In a superbly reflective piece, McCrory (2015) evaluates her own teaching by looking at the misconceptions arising amongst year 10 students from her use of a card-sorting exercise to teach about Hitler’s rise to the Chancellorship in Germany. She explores how, having initially failed to clearly teach the concept of causation and articulate the task at hand in terms of seeking the causative explanatory reasoning behind Hitler’s rise to power, the students ended up during the card-sorting task ‘interact[ing] with the facts as if sorting coloured buttons into jars, with no conception that information was not simply there to be shuffled for content classification but rather to be interrogated for influence, interconnectivity and importance’ (McCrory, 2015: 41). The implications of this for McCrory are clear: teachers often ‘mistake shared words for shared meaning’; students ‘are routinely exposed to the same vocabulary and phrase patterns but … they integrate those ideas into their thinking in more or less sophisticated ways and with more or less engagement with the referents in the world to which those phrases apply’ (McCrory, 2015: 41). At the heart of the problematic that McCrory here identifies are questions of teacher confidence in their understanding and recontextualisation of powerful knowledge, and the limits that can be put on learning if student meaning-making is not taken account of. It is simply not enough to presume that powerful knowledge, skillfully recontextualised into an engaging format and delivered in memorable ways, will be learned by students in the manner that the teacher hopes, nor that students will extract the same meaning that the teacher intends. A strong curriculum rooted in powerful knowledge, coupled with a pedagogic style that neglects to account for student meaning-making and the inferential connections that students are making as they learn, will not necessarily lead to the acquisition of powerful knowledge by students. If we take the curriculum to be where teachers frame and sequence powerful knowledge, packaging and recontextualising it, then the pedagogic situations within which this curriculum is delivered become the sites of meaning-making, where students engage with this powerful knowledge and transform it into owned knowledge. The classroom is the space where ‘making claims and asking for reasons enables students to access the meaning making that is valued in the disciplinary discourse in which they are participating’ (Firth and Strutt (2019): 154–155). Whereas powerful knowledge is frequently conceptualized mainly as a tool for curriculum planning, inferentialism draws our attention to the significance of student meaning-making through the pedagogic encounter, given that it is through the norms and rules of the discipline that students learn to make accurate inferential connections. As Derry (2013: 143), puts it, ‘knowledge domains have a particular inferential structure, and learners’ induction into domains involves their becoming responsive to a new inferential structure by modifying their use of concepts.’ Consequently, the students themselves have an important part to play as agents who actively make meaning

94

D. Whittall

from the recontextualised curricular content they are taught via the specific pedagogic situations through which they engage with that knowledge. Through their direct engagement in making meaning out of the powerful knowledge taught in classrooms, the way in which students assimilate learned content into owned knowledge becomes the crucial final step in the process of recontextualisation. With this being the case, much more attention ought to be devoted to understanding the ways that students themselves understand, integrate and make meaning from the knowledge that they are taught. A significant body of work exists that takes seriously the ways in which students understand the geography they are taught. Amongst lower school students, it has been suggested that they derive particular enjoyment and fascination from the study of places, natural hazards, environmental issues and diverse cultures (Norman & Harrison, 2004). Similarly, research with year 8 and 9 students has suggested that a focus of interest for students is often areas such as maps and places (Biddulph & Adey, 2004). This corresponds well with research by the Higher Education Academy which also suggests the importance of maps to young people’s sense of what geography is about in year 8. This research also explored ideas about geography amongst 6th form students, and drew the conclusion that ‘students’ perceptions of geography do develop throughout secondary school becoming broader and more sophisticated, e.g. moving away from the study of maps to being more about processes and interactions’ (King, 2007: 13). In his book Geography in Secondary Schools, Hopwood (2012: 1) argues that ‘we can learn a great deal by exploring the way young people make sense of their world’. In his research Hopwood gathered a richly detailed array of empirical data from 6 students across three different English schools with whom he spent extensive amounts of time observing lessons, talking and discussing as well as analysing work and written responses. In doing so Hopwood produced a narrative account that offered an overview of the divergent, complex and often incoherent ways in which the young people with whom he researched understood and interpreted the subject of geography. His close and detailed research went beyond earlier work based mostly on written questionnaires by showing that young people are capable of complex and diverse explanations of the importance and relevance of geography. Overall, Hopwood concludes that students hold varied and multifaceted ideas about the nature and importance of geography, and he urges that researchers take account of these perspectives on a fine grained and case by case basis (Hopwood, 2012: 163–179). Each student’s conceptions of geography, Hopwood has suggested elsewhere, ought to be conceived of as ‘potentially unique assemblages of ideas and opinions’ (Hopwood, 2009: 187). These assemblages of ideas and opinions represent the point at which students are assimilating their understanding of recontextualised disciplinary knowledge as taught in classrooms with their everyday knowledges to transform it into owned knowledge. Students are constructing inferential links from the geographical concepts they have been taught, subject to constraints imposed by the limits and framings of the discipline. Student meaning-making thus occurs as part of a process of developing an orientation towards Geography as a discipline, albeit as a discipline

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

95

that has been recontextualised and repackaged by teachers as curriculum makers (Lambert & Morgan, 2010). In this moment, as Margaret Roberts has argued, geographical education is taking on a particular power as it ‘enables students to make connections between their everyday knowledge and school geography’ (Roberts, 2017: 6; 2014). The implication of this, as Richard Bustin (2019: 154) has recently spelled out, is that there ought to be a greater research focus ‘on the pupils themselves, how they respond to and work with notions of powerful knowledge’ in order to further ‘investigate pupil perceptions of knowledge’. It is directly towards this end that the current chapter is directed. Despite the tremendous value of Hopwood’s earlier research in providing insights into students’ ideas and opinions about geography, it has certain limitations in terms of its capacity to enable us to understand students attitudes to powerful knowledge in geography. One such limitation is through Hopwood’s reluctance to assess the quality of the knowledge that students discuss with him. Take, for example, his discussion of pupils’ ideas about the conceptual categories of space and place. From the onset, Hopwood (2012: 141) eschews any desire to analyse what students tell him ‘in relation to developments in notions of space and place in academic geography’. He also explicitly leaves to the side the role of teachers in his discussion of students’ perspectives. Whilst there is value to be gotten from the weight of analysis falling primarily on what students have to say about geography education, there is also a risk that we miss the entangled nature of students and teachers in the educational encounter from a reading of Hopwood’s work. His understandable desire to situate the claims made by students in their classroom and everyday contexts enables Hopwood’s research to reveal the multifaceted nature of young people’s conceptions of geography, but limits our ability to understand how such conceptions emerge out of specific educational encounters, or to make judgements on the epistemic quality of the geographical conceptions being discussed. In what follows, I will bring Hopwood’s work more closely into dialogue with a tradition of educational thought that focuses on classrooms as spaces of educational encounter and which, in turn, brings the relationship between student, teacher and knowledge back into the frame of analysis.

7.3  T  heorising the Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Knowledge: Didactics and Curriculum Making The work of Hopwood and others has convincingly demonstrated the importance of taking account of student perspectives when it comes to Geography education. Roger Firth has argued forcefully that a central principle of Geography in schools ought to be to develop students’ ‘dispositions towards knowledge’, and towards geographical knowledge in particular, given that ‘it is only when students engage with the social practices within disciplines that they can … develop an orientation

96

D. Whittall

to knowledge. Without this, knowledge acquisition is meaningless’ (Firth, 2011: 300). Consequently, Firth urges educators to ensure that ‘students are not denied access to the underlying principles of knowledge or the nature of the language of the discipline’. In ensuring that students are granted such access to knowledge, Firth urges us to consider young people as being ‘social and epistemic actors in their own right’ (Firth, 2011: 306), and suggests that students ought to be considered as being one amongst several ‘epistemic communities’ involved in actively recontextualising the discipline of Geography via their engagement with Geography as school subject (Firth, 2011: 307). When school-based education comes to be understood in such a way, both the curriculum and the classroom can be seen as ‘spaces of interaction’ between these diverse epistemic communities. Developing a more rounded understanding of each requires that we give ‘a more active, interpretive role to both teachers and students (Firth, 2011: 308). Firth is right to suggest that the field of social realism out of which Michael Young’s ideas on powerful knowledge have emerged has to date given too little attention to students as active participants in the process of recontextualising knowledge. One way to address this gap is to seek to link the curriculum theories of the social realists to the pedagogic analyses of those who centre their attention on classroom contexts through a focus on the ways in which classroom-centred educational encounters lead to the transformation of knowledge. There is an important distinction to bear in mind here between pedagogy – the teaching strategies chosen and implemented by the teacher – on the one hand, and curriculum – the planned and sequenced content knowledge itself – on the other. Gericke et al. (2018) reframe the Bernsteinian interest in recontextualisation by looking at the idea of knowledge ‘transformation’ within an educational context. For them, ‘transformation’ is ‘an integrative process in which content knowledge is transformed into knowledge that is taught and learned through various transformation processes both outside and within the educational system’ (Gericke et al., 2018: 432–433). Within their framework, the classroom represents ‘the last step in the transformation process’, and also ‘the most important’. This is because ‘at the classroom level, the teacher, and to some extent the students, become actors in the process of defining powerful knowledge’ (Gericke et al., 2018: 436, emphasis added). They argue strongly that powerful knowledge ought to be conceptualised not merely as a curriculum principle, but that instead ‘teachers and students should be considered to play an important part in the enactment process’ of powerful knowledge (Gericke et al., 2018: 436, emphasis added). Through a focus on the ‘enactment process’ by which powerful knowledge is transformed in classroom contexts, Gericke et al. (2018: 10) enable us to centre our attention as geography education researchers upon ‘the actual teaching situation, when teachers and students are confronted with the representations of content’. In doing so, they suggest that we could frame our enquiries using the Didactic Triangle (Fig. 7.1) proposed by the German educationalist Wolfgang Klafki. The Didactic Triangle attempts to illustrate the relationship between the three core sub-systems of the educational encounter – the teacher, the subject content, and

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

97

Fig 7.1  The didactic triangle. (Adapted from Gericke et al. (2018: 437))

the students – and to show how they are framed by both school and wider social contexts. It is the role of the teacher, within the model, to select and represent subject content through the pedagogic relation, whereas students bring their experiences to bear on that content via the didactic relation. Learning occurs through the classroom interactions between students and teachers, out of which students make meaning and develop inferential relations between the different aspects of the knowledge they engage with. Gericke et  al. use the didactic triangle to set out the ways in which powerful knowledge is transformed. They suggest that in order to ‘be able to discern powerful knowledge at the classroom level, we need to empirically investigate teachers’ and students’ understandings of the content knowledge and not only take as our point of departure the disciplinary knowledge itself’ (Gericke et al., 2018: 11). This argument is complemented by the work of Bladh et al. (2018), who have sought to outline ways in which Young’s curriculum-centred theory of powerful knowledge might be drawn into dialogue with a pedagogical focus on how knowledge is transformed in particular classroom contexts. Again drawing on the work of Klafki, Bladh et al. (2018: 404–406) argue that a crucial aspect of a teacher’s pedagogic practice is their appreciation of ‘the relations between different forms of knowledge’ and their ability to ‘design and establish a knowledge practice and make it function as a learning practice for pupils’. Within this framework, they too follow Gericke et  al. (2018) in urging attention to students’ preconceptions, pervious knowledge, and the way in which these two aspects integrate with the powerful knowledge of the classroom to become the ‘owned knowledge’ of the student. These ways of framing the educational encounter via the work of Wolfgang Klafki and his Didactic Triangle have much in common with a more recent Anglophone tradition of thinking about the role of the teacher as a ‘curriculum

98

D. Whittall

maker’ (Butt, 2019: 90–92). As expounded by Lambert and Morgan (2010: 50), the idea of curriculum making (see Chap. 6 in this book, Fig. 6.1) frames teaching as having ‘an internal coherence representing something more than simply an accumulation of short-term objectives’. Teaching, in this way of thinking, draws upon three distinct yet related ‘zones of influence’, which at the same time act as ‘sources of energy’ for the educational encounter: the subject being taught (curriculum), the teaching methods (pedagogy) being deployed, and the students’ experiences (Lambert & Morgan, 2010: 50). In an extended discussion of curriculum making, Lambert has argued that the curriculum ought to be understood as something that is ‘implemented by teachers’ and ‘experienced by students in a manner that is always open to interpretation (Lambert, 2014: 167). Curriculum-making, as Lambert (2014: 183) argues, thus involves ‘merging the conceptually distinct categories of curriculum and pedagogy’ through a focus on the transformation of powerful knowledge in the educational encounter between teachers and students in specific classroom contexts. What we have here, then, is a body of work that is drawing attention to the importance of how powerful knowledge is transformed, or recontextualised, through educational encounters within which young people play a crucial role. They bring to the educational encounter what Lambert and Morgan (2010: 50) refer to as their ‘curiosities, ingenuity and often individual interests’, and they use these, as Nick Hopwood (2012) has shown, to transform the knowledge that they engage with in classrooms in their own complex and particular ways. This opens a space for us to respond to Gericke et al.’s (2018) call for ‘more in depth micro-studies focusing on the act of content negotiations between the teacher and the students’. It is to this end that the remainder of this study devotes itself, via an in depth micro-study, based on multi-method research, of the ways in which a small group of sixth form students (aged 17–18) in the UK understand and conceptualise the geographical knowledge that they encounter in classroom contexts.

7.4  S  ixth Form Students’ Perspectives on Powerful Knowledge in Geography: A Classroom Micro-study As a classroom teacher, I have the luxury of engaging with students’ conceptions – and misconceptions  – of powerful geographical knowledge on a daily basis. Thinking in terms of the Didactic Triangle has enabled me to understand the dynamics at play in the educational encounters that occur in the classrooms where I teach, and to interpret that space as one in which the broader process of curriculum making comes to life through the lived and experiential entanglements of student, teacher, and school subject  – academic discipline. Hopwood’s work has shown that students’ understandings of ‘particular learning experiences or aspects of geographical knowledge’ can be shaped through what they experience in the classroom and through the way in which taught knowledge is assimilated into everyday

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

99

understandings (Hopwood, 2012: 142–143). Meanwhile, the work of the Young People’s Geographies Project (for which Hopwood was project evaluator), has highlighted the value that can potentially be derived from conversations between students and teachers about the process of curriculum making, and about geographical knowledge (Firth & Biddulph, 2009; Firth et al., 2010). As the project findings made clear, conversation between students and teachers about geographical knowledge can take on a radically participatory aspect through the way in which it enables students to have an input into the learning process (Butt, 2019: 88–89). As Mary Biddulph reports, students involved in the project were ‘very clear that they needed their geography teachers, as both subject experts to guide and challenge them to think about the subject and with the subject, and as expert teachers who understand how to enable young people to access new and complex ideas’ (Biddulph, 2011: 54). Such findings suggest that there is value in teachers talking with students about their conceptions of the powerful knowledge that is to be gained from a geographical education. However, what is clear from both Hopwood’s research and from the YPG project is that such conversations need to be both focused and multi-method, not based simply around the analysis of quantitative data from written survey responses. Student perspectives and conceptions are notoriously difficult things to assess, with some psychological research indicating that students are in general poor judges of their own learning (Kirschner & van Merrienboer, 2013). However, as Hopwood shows, mixed method approaches have the potential to allow researchers access to the ideas, opinions and conceptions of students (Hopwood, 2009, 2012: 12–23; Butt, 2019: 129). Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that there is only so much that talking to students can reveal about their role in recontextualising knowledge. Other approaches, including observations of behavior, responses and peer-to-peer classroom conversations, as well as students’ written work and assessment tasks and evaluative exercises such as concept mapping, can be used to reveal more about what Graham Nuthall (2007: 84) has called ‘the three worlds of the classroom’ – the public world managed by the teacher’, the ‘semi-­ private world of ongoing peer relationships’, and ‘the private world of the child’s own mind’. However, such research is complex, requiring multiple researchers at work over prolonged periods of time. Such research was beyond the scope of this initial study, though it is intended to form a part of future research.

7.4.1  Methodology Primary data was initially collected from students using a questionnaire survey that was distributed to my year 12 and year 13 geography classes. Once responses had been collected and analysed, the conversation was furthered through focus group discussions and individual interviews with students, as well as my own diary notes about teaching and learning encounters in the classroom with students. The research was further complemented by carrying out a similar process with year 12 students at another nearby 6th form school. The sample sizes were small – 8 students in the

100

D. Whittall

internal class, and 6 in the external class. Nor was there any systematic selection of classes for the data sample – these were merely the class that I taught, and an external class in another school with which we had developed a close relation through shared field trips. Consequently, no claims will be made here to the representative nature of data and responses. Rather, their significance lies in how the students’ responses shed light on the approach outlined above, and what they reveal about the potential for further research into the role of students themselves in the process of recontextualising disciplinary knowledge. In the questionnaires, a series of open and closed questions were used to ask students their opinions on what makes the knowledge that they are taught in Geography powerful. Key words from their responses were then extracted through a coding process that identified statements relevant to Michael Young’s definition of powerful knowledge as being that which takes students beyond their everyday surroundings. These key words were then used as prompts for questioning in the focus groups and interviews. Once these responses had been analysed I drew upon the work of Alaric Maude to further evaluate the ways that students were framing their experiences of geographical knowledge. Maude has produced a typology that highlights five categories of powerful knowledge that are at the core of geographical education. These can be summarized in the following ways (Maude, 2015, 2018): 1. Knowledge that provides students with ‘new ways of thinking about the world’. 2. Knowledge that provides students with powerful ways of analysing, explaining and understanding. 3. Knowledge that gives students some power over their own geographical knowledge. 4. Knowledge that enables young people to follow and participate in debates on significant local, national and global issues. 5. Knowledge of the world. This typology has most often been used to evaluate the level or quality of powerful knowledge in certain curricula, or to assess teachers’ understandings of powerful knowledge. (Maude, 2015; Bouwmans & Beneker, 2018; Tani et  al., 2018). However, the typology can also be used as a framework to assess students own understandings of powerful knowledge in geography by exploring which of Maude’s types students most frequently articulate their experiences of geography within.

7.4.2  Findings and Analysis The students’ prime focus on the powerful knowledge provided by Geography appears to be twofold. First, they centred their responses on global warming, climate change, sustainability and other inter-related terminology. These findings suggest that this group of A Level Geography students put significant weight on the importance of the discipline in teaching them about global environmental issues.

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

101

This is perhaps unsurprising, given both the topicality of these issues in the wider culture and the relative importance of environmental issues in Geography teaching across a range of topics at both GCSE and A Level. Perhaps more surprising is the finding that pupils also take seriously an aspect of Geography’s powerful knowledge that is all-too-often over-looked. A central idea that these students focused upon was that of the ‘world’. This can seem, at times, like a static back-drop upon which events occur – the stage upon which we set our teaching. Yet students are evidently thinking the relevance of Geography in terms of the discipline’s ability to help them comprehend their world, and are doing so at a properly global scale. This corresponds with Hopwood’s work, where he also found students articulating their understanding of the geographical knowledge they had learned in the classroom in terms of ‘the world’ (Hopwood, 2012: 91–93). It is significant in this regard that other terms, such as local and national, are present in the word cloud but are significantly smaller. This is suggestive of the fact that students see Geography as the ‘world discipline’ (Bonnett, 2003), and that it is in these terms that they explicitly conceptualise how the subject helps them to think beyond the confines of their everyday experience. These findings were to an extent confirmed when students were asked to nominate and comment upon the concepts that they considered to be most powerful in their geographical education experiences so far. Once again, themes with an environmental and sustainability focus dominate. This time, though, they are joined by a series of broader geographical ideas. Given the importance of the idea of ‘the world’ in our previous analysis, it should be unsurprising that the most important concept to follow those of climate change and sustainability is that of globalisation. When asked to discuss the reasoning for their ideas in interviews and focus groups, it became clear that students are using geographical ideas to interpret issues of significance beyond their everyday experience. For example, one student highlighted the importance of the fact that ‘ideas that we are taught in our geography classes are very useful as they have a lot of real world application and help us to understand the world around us better.’ The same student also noted that geographical knowledge was important because it was ‘very relevant’ to ‘controversial issues’, and that it also helped to provide ‘a better insight into the world’. Another student highlighted the fact that Geography helps ‘explore ideas from all perspectives, whether it is from different political backgrounds or the social class that you are in’. This student noted that acquiring geographical knowledge mattered because ‘students then feel empowered that they can make a difference, motivating them to make world changing decisions in the future’. This same student emphasised the way in which geographical knowledge helped students to ‘take responsibility for our actions’. This would appear to suggest that these students appreciate the way in which they are acquiring type 2 powerful knowledge, and interpret the ideas they are learning in lessons in ways that allow them to analyse, explain and understand their everyday world in terms different to those they would use had they not studied Geography. These quotes from interviews with two students and questionnaire

102

D. Whittall

responses from another give a flavour of their interpretations of the power of geographical knowledge. There are many more similar quotes from their peers. There is some evidence here of students interpreting the powerful knowledge acquired through Geography in terms directly resembling those of types 1 and 4 of Maude’s typology – new ways of thinking about the world, and participating in debates on topical issues. We might also infer from what has been said that students are aware of the ways in which Geography aids their knowledge of the world  – type 5 of Maude’s typology. Earlier, we gestured towards Michael Young’s assertion that powerful knowledge is in part that which encourages students to envisage alternative futures. Here we have seen students talking in exactly those terms about the knowledge they acquire through Geography, and focusing specifically on the concepts of sustainability and globalization as they do so. The research also addressed student perspectives on the learning encounter itself. I asked students to consider what they found to be the best ways in which they acquired and engaged with powerful knowledge. From their responses, students indicated that they find the quality of the explanations provided by their teacher most important. For example, one student stated that teacher explanations had proven useful in understanding how ‘processes like deindustrialisation have shaped the lives of people in different places like London Docklands and Halifax in very different ways’. Here, not only is this student reflecting on how they learn geographical knowledge but they are also reflecting on their learning in a manner that illustrates type 1 of Maude’s powerful knowledge framework, the way that geographical knowledge provides ‘new ways of thinking about the world’. When asked to expand upon these results, another student commented that quality of teacher explanations ‘is vital to how we learn’ and that all the other categories are only important insofar as ‘they are needed to assist explanations’. It might be thought that these results occurred simply because these students were those that I taught myself, and that they were thus simply telling me what they thought I wanted to hear. It’s worth highlighting the fact, then, that the students I researched with at another nearby 6th form school also thought the same  – that teacher explanations were the most important element of the learning encounter – and this despite the fact that I had never taught them. The third highest category, high quality lesson resources, is also an area over which teachers have significant agency. Students spoke of the importance they placed on being able to see how concepts played out using visual images and maps in particular, and were keen to emphasise the importance of well-used video clips in learning about specific places. One student, for instance, gave the example of the role played by news clips alongside before-and-after images, in helping understand the severity of the impacts of the Nepal earthquake of 2015. Here again, students emphasised the role of the teacher in selecting relevant resources, noting that although technology was useful for research purposes ‘it is sometimes hard to find the most relevant information’ when undirected. Students from both schools ranked text books bottom in terms of their usefulness for learning powerful knowledge. Yet this should not immediately be taken as a direct confirmation of the anti-textbook culture of UK education that Nicky Platt

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

103

(2018) and others have drawn our attention to. In interviews, it emerged that students often found textbooks helpful in going over material, in reviewing their notes from lessons to check for necessary details, but that they found them less useful for acquiring new knowledge in the first place. Some of my teaching colleagues have suggested that this result may be skewed by what they see as being a general decline in recognizing the importance of reading as part of the learning process amongst A Level students, but to my mind this does not appear to be the case here given the relatively high ranking given to independent reading by students. Interestingly, when pressed to explain the importance of wider reading to their encounters with geographical knowledge students were clear on the important role of teacher direction in guiding such learning. They explained how frustrating they could find it to research topics independently, and referenced the difficulties that they had with identifying sources that they considered trustworthy and reliable amidst the general clutter of the internet. There is clearly a role here for expert teachers to support and direct students around wider reading, selecting and supplying specific texts to students. Here too we see the importance of recontextualisation and the teacher’s role in mediating the learning encounter between the discipline of Geography, their specific students, and wider society. One aspect of successful learning that may differ for Geography in comparison to other subjects is the high placing given to fieldwork in students’ understandings of how best to succeed in acquiring powerful knowledge. Students talked of how the experience of learning about other places was enhanced by visiting them, and also explained that they found it easier to comprehend and interpret geographical terminology when they engaged with it in the field. This tallies with the recent findings of Alan Kinder (2018) and others that fieldwork has an important role to play in the development of geographical knowledge.

7.5  Conclusions Based on a small-scale micro-study, this chapter does not propose to have a definitive empirical answer to the opening research question of ‘what role do students play in the recontextualisation and transformation of powerful knowledge?’ Instead, the chapter has developed an approach for understanding how students engage with, understand and interpret the powerful knowledge that they encounter in classrooms, and has tested its relevance through small-scale primary research project. Drawing on the work of Nick Hopwood and others, it has been suggested that young people’s voices ought to be considered when it comes to understanding how the powerful disciplinary knowledge is received in the form of a recontextualised school subject. This recontextualised school subject is taught and learned in specific classroom-­ centred educational encounters that can be conceptualised, following Wolfgang Klafki’s Didactic Triangle, as a space of encounter between teacher, student and subject. It is in this space that students are involved in making meaning as they interact with the knowledge that teachers have recontextualised for them. Given the

104

D. Whittall

importance that the recontextualisation of knowledge has from the perspective of emergent curriculum theories derived from the tradition of social realism and the sociology of education, this chapter as argued that the next step is to develop a form of educational research and teaching practice that enables us to evaluate the further recontextualisation, or what Gericke et al. (2018) refer to as the ‘transformation’, of powerful knowledge in classroom contexts. Accounting for students’ perceptions ought to be central to such an endeavour. Engaging with students as educational actors in their own right enables us as geography education researchers to assess and evaluate the ways in which those in receipt of powerful knowledge comprehend their own attempts to assimilate this knowledge into their already-existing knowledge schemas and transform it into ‘owned knowledge’. At the same time, given the prominence of students to the educational encounter and to the process of curriculum making it would appear remiss of us to neglect students’ conceptions from our research. There are opportunities here for us to gain deeper insights into the processes and outcomes through which students make meaning out of the content they engage with in classrooms, and to explore the inferential connections they develop as they engage with knowledge in classroom contexts. At the same time, from the perspective of teaching, engaging with the understandings of the students we teach can help us to address misconceptions, and to evaluate the ways in which the young people we teach interpret and conceptualise the content that we are encouraging them to engage with. The final part of this chapter reported on the findings of a micro-study into student perceptions amongst a small group of A Level Geography students in England and their perspectives on the subject’s powerful knowledge. The empirical data upon which this is based is admittedly limited, being a small-scale study designed to establish the relevance and significance of accounting for students themselves as actors in the recontextualisation process. However, both the data and the gaps within it are revealing of some important future directions in this emerging area of research. Using Alaric Maude’s five-part typology, the findings appear to suggest that these particular groups of students interpret the power of geographical knowledge most directly in terms of types 1 and 4, namely, thinking about new ways of understanding the world and being provided with the tools to join in with topical discussions and debates. Types 2 and 5 – powerful ways to analyse and understand the world, and direct knowledge of the world – are both clearly referenced by students as well. At the same time, these students were much less likely to talk about their encounters with Geography’s powerful knowledge in terms of type 3  – giving students power over their own geographical knowledge. There are hints in this direction – recall their concerns about identifying ‘truthful’ sources of knowledge for further reading. But it is clear that this element – an understanding of the origins and evolution of the concepts they have encountered, and an awareness of their own roles in shaping these concepts in future – is by far the least developed. On a personal basis this has now had a clear impact on my planning and teaching – I flag such information up much more clearly now, and set tasks, consolidation activities and wider readings that support students in recognizing their power over and ownership of

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

105

geographical knowledge, and their position within the broader traditions of the discipline. This returns us to the tradition of didactical analysis discussed earlier. Gericke et al. (2018) propose that ‘the value of any content knowledge can only be ascertained with reference to the individual learner’. This is because, as per the inferentialist approach of Robert Brandom, the value of the content knowledge can only be understood in terms of the meanings that students make from it. Yet within this context it is impossible fully to disentangle the learner from the other elements of transformation and recontextualisation  – the subject and the teacher. Powerful knowledge is, after all and in the words of Gericke et al. (2018), ‘acted upon and transformed by both teachers and students’. These ideas point us towards several future areas that ought to see further research in order to develop our understanding of the role played by students in the recontextualisation of knowledge. Questions worthy of exploring along these lines ought to include: 1. To what extent do students shape the recontextualisation of powerful knowledge via the pedagogic relation, given the impact that they have on shaping the choices a teacher makes about what and how to teach? 2. How do students themselves directly recontextualise knowledge through the didactic relation that they themselves have to the content knowledge of the discipline, both in classrooms and outside, in their home-learning and independent study environments? 3. Is the pedagogic relation or the didactic relation more important in terms of how students transform subject knowledge into owned knowledge? 4. To what extent do teacher confidence, subject expertise, and experience shape the extent to which students transform powerful knowledge? 5. For particular areas of geographical knowledge, what inferential bonds of meaning are students generating between concepts as they transform powerful knowledge into owned knowledge? 6. What research methods might be most suited to exploring how students make meaning from geographical concepts? 7. What implications does this account of the role of the student in the process of recontextualisation have for the curriculum making process? There is here a clear agenda for a programme of research that would help us to learn much more about the previously under-studied role of students in the recontextualisation process. Didactical analysis implies that there is value to be gotten from teachers directly engaging in conversations with students about the nature of the learning encounters that lead to the acquisition of and engagement with powerful knowledge. It also offers a lens through which to begin to explore in more depth the specific inferential connections that students make as they learn geographical knowledge, and to analyse both the meaning-making that students are performing through the didactic relationship they hold with the subject, and the ways that the teacher can best support the higher development of this through the pedagogic relation they hold with their students. If Richard Bustin (2019: 58) is right to suggest that ‘studying geography is about being able to learn like a geographer, understand

106

D. Whittall

how geographical knowledge is created, debated and argued over and not simply about learning geographical facts’, then it must also be important for the geography educational research community to find out more about student perspectives on powerful knowledge, and their role in the process of recontextualising and transforming it.

References Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy symbolic control and identity (2nd ed.). Rowman and Littlefield. Biddulph, M. (2011). ‘Young people’s geographies: Implications for secondary school geography. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 44–59). Continuum. Biddulph, M., & Adey, K. (2004). Pupil perceptions of effective teaching and subject relevance in history and geography at key stage 3. Research in Education, 71, 1–8. Bladh, G., Stolare, M., & Kristiansson, M. (2018). Curriculum principles, didactic practice and social issues: Thinking through teachers’ knowledge practices in collaborative work. London Review of Education, 16(3), 398–413. Bonnett, A. (2003). Geography as the world discipline: Connecting popular and academic geographical imaginations. Area, 35(1), 55–63. Bouwmans, M., & Beneker, T. (2018). Identifying powerful geographical knowledge in integrated curricula in Dutch schools. London Review of Education, 16(3), 445–459. Brooks, C. (2016). Teacher subject identity in professional practice: Teaching with a professional compass. Routledge. Brooks, C., Butt, G., & Fargher, M. (Eds.). (2017). The power of geographical thinking. Springer. Bustin, R. (2019). Geography education’s potential and the capability approach: Geocapabilities and schools. Palgrave Macmillan. Butt, G. (2019). Geography education research in the UK: Retrospect and prospect. The UK case, within the global context. Springer. Derry, J. (2013). Vygotsky: Philosophy and education. Wiley Blackwell. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children’s ideas in science. Open University Press. Dove, J. (2014). Exploring students’ ideas about the Arctic. Teaching Geography, 39(3), 102–105. Firth, R. (2011). Making geography visible as an object of study in the secondary school curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 22(3), 289–316. Firth, R. (2017). What might inferentialism’s view of the human knower have to offer geography education? Geography, 102(2), 86–90. Firth, R. (2018). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Routledge. Firth, R., & Biddulph, M. (2009). Young people’s geographies. Teaching Geography, 34(1), 32–34. Firth, R., Biddulph, M., Riley, H., Gaunt, I., & Buxton, C. (2010). How can young people take an active role in the geography curriculum? Teaching Geography, 35(2), 49. Firth, R., & Strutt, A. (2019). “Mapping out” the inferential relations of the subject content of geography lessons: A planning intervention for pre-service teachers to support teaching and learning. In G. Stylianides & A. Childs (Eds.), Classroom-based interventions across subject areas: Research to understand what works in education (pp. 138–162). Routledge. Gericke, N., Hudson, B., Olin-Scheller, C., & Stolare, M. (2018). Powerful knowledge, transformations and the need for empirical studies across school subjects. London Review of Education, 16(3), 428–444. Hopwood, N. (2009). UK high school pupils’ conceptions of geography: Research findings and methodological implications. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 18(3), 185–197.

7  The Role of Students in the Recontextualisation and Transformation of Powerful…

107

Hopwood, N. (2011). Young people’s conceptions of geography and education. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 30–43). Continuum. Hopwood, N. (2012). Geography in secondary schools: Researching pupils’ classroom experiences. Bloomsbury. Kinder, A. (2018). Acquiring geographical knowledge and understanding through fieldwork. Teaching Geography, 43(3), 109–112. King, H. (2007). Student perceptions of geography, Earth and environmental sciences: Final report to schools Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences July 2007. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/1student_perception_geographygees_final_report.pdf. Last accessed 11th July 2018. Kirschner, P., & van Merrienboer, J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183. Lambert, D. (2014). Subject teachers in knowledge led schools. In M.  Young, D.  Lambert, C.  Roberts, & M.  Roberts (Eds.), Knowledge and the future school: Curriculum and social justice (pp. 159–187). Bloomsbury. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2010), Teaching geography 11–18 a conceptual approach. OUP. Lane, R., & Coutts, P. (2015). Working with students’ ideas in physical geography: A model of knowledge development and application. Geographical Education, 28, 27–40. Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge. Maude, A. (2015). What is powerful knowledge and can it be found in the Australian geography curriculum? Geography Education, 27(2), 18–26. Maude, A. (2018). Geography and powerful knowledge: A contribution to the debate. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 25(3), 179–190. McCrory, C. (2015). The knowledge illusion: Who is doing what thinking? Teaching History, 161, 37–47. Norman, M., & Harrison, L. (2004). Year 9 students’ perceptions of school geography. Teaching Geography, 29(1), 11–15. Nuthall, G. (2007). The hidden lives of learners. NZCER Press. Paechter, C. (1998). School and the ownership of knowledge. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 6(2), 161–176. Platt, N. (2018). Powerful knowledge and the textbook. London Review of Education, 16(3), 414–427. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25(2), 187–209. Roberts, M. (2017). Geographical education is powerful if…. Teaching Geography, 42(1), 6–9. Standish, A., & Cuthbert, A.  S. (2017a). Introduction. In A.  Standish & A.  S. Cuthbert (Eds.), What should schools teach? Disciplines, subjects and the pursuit of truth (pp. xvii–xxv). UCL Institute of Education Press. Standish, A., & Cuthbert, A. S. (2017b). Disciplinary knowledge and school subjects. In A. Standish & A. S. Cuthbert (Eds.), What should schools teach? Disciplines, subjects and the pursuit of truth (pp. 1–19). UCL Institute of Education Press. Tani, S., Cantell, H., & Hilander, M. (2018). Powerful disciplinary knowledge and the status of geography in Finnish upper secondary schools: Teachers’ views on recent changes. J-Readings: Journal of Research and Didactics in Geography, 1, 5–16. Whittall, D. (2019). Learning powerful knowledge successfully: Perspectives from 6th form geography students. Impact: Journal of the Chartered College of Teaching Issue, 5. Young, M. (2008). From constructivism to realism in the sociology of the curriculum. Review of Research in Education, 32, 1–32. Young, M. (2013). Powerful knowledge: An analytically useful concept or just a ‘sexy sounding term’? A response to John Beck’s ‘powerful knowledge, esoteric knowledge, curriculum knowledge’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43, 195–198. Young, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge as a curriculum principle. In M.  Young, D.  Lambert, C.  Roberts, & M.  Roberts (Eds.), Knowledge and the future school: Curriculum and social justice (pp. 65–88). Bloomsbury.

Chapter 8

Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence Osvaldo Muñiz Solari

8.1  Introduction This chapter focuses on the question of how undergraduate geography students in American universities can better acquire disciplinary knowledge in geography and make the transition toward recontextualised knowledge. Recontextualisation is considered here as presented by Firth (2018), who reflects on Bernstein’s theory (Bernstein, 1971) of the pedagogic device and the structure of knowledge. The extension of Bernstein’s concept of recontextualisation related to the space of interaction between epistemic communities (discipline, teacher, and student) is examined. However, for the purpose of responding to the question, this study is more focalized on the practice of pedagogy exerted by the teachers as a recontextualiser of knowledge (Firth, 2018) – in this case ‘facilitators’ (Quinn & Vorster, 2016) – on the students and how the latter respond to a more active role in the process of learning. Rather than paying special attention to the regulative discourse; one of the two rules that control recontextualization (Bernstein, 1990), the focus of this study is on the instructional discourse in relation to pedagogic practices, mainly from transmission and acquisition to construction and meaning-making (Maton, 2014). It could be stated that a great number of high school students in the United States do not receive enough knowledge in geography and they enter college with poor or no knowledge about the world from a geographical perspective (Muñiz Solari, 2018). Additionally, the global citizenship approach to global learning that is influential in UK schools (Hopkin & Kitchen, 2018) is not widely present in US schools. Thus, the pedagogic environment selected for this experience is a World Geography course; one of the lower-division courses that students take in any four-year college O. Muñiz Solari (*) Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_8

109

110

O. Muñiz Solari

or university. Although the center of attention is on a lower-division course, the study of the instructional discourse might also be of interest to other instructors who are confronted with pedagogic practices in more advanced undergraduate geography courses. There is a need not only to guide students with particular teaching strategies to acquire disciplinary knowledge, but also provide them the necessary tools to recontextualise knowledge and develop powerful knowledge. Since the introduction of powerful knowledge debates by Michael Young (2008) there has been an increasing as well as widespread recognition among geography educators that this special kind of knowledge is important in geography. Much has been written on powerful knowledge and powerful geographical knowledge in terms of philosophy, epistemology, and pedagogical approach, being the latter about curriculum (Catling & Martin, 2011; Firth, 2011, 2013; Morgan, 2011, 2015; Roberts, 2014). There are other approaches that analyze forms and types of powerful geographical knowledge (Lambert, 2011, 2014; Maude, 2015, 2016). Numerous contributions have focused on curriculum issues and, more recently, powerful knowledge has been extended to powerful disciplinary knowledge (PDK) through the GeoCapabilities project (Solem et al., 2013; Lambert, 2014; Lambert et al., 2015). Some curriculum propositions in the form of artefacts constructed in ArcGIS Online (Fargher, 2018) or simple graphics and vignettes (Boehm et al. 2018) have resulted from this approach. Nevertheless, the attempts to demonstrate the validity and efficiency of this theoretical approach through exploring examples of real practice are still insufficient. Furthermore, White (2018) argues that there are serious problems of interpretation and a weakness in Young’s thinking (2008, 2015) about powerful knowledge, pointing out, among other issues, the lack of evident practice to demonstrate the powerful condition of theoretical concepts. The instructional discourse related to pedagogic practices requires conformation when the center of knowledge is the study of the world. It is about mastering complex concepts in geography and ultimately conceptual contributions such as connectedness and interdependence. Massey (2014) points out that the importance of these concepts requires understanding of the global perception of place and environment. Equally important for her is space that “is the dimension of simultaneity, of things, events, people existing at the same moment” (Massey, 2014: 38). Whilst global does not entail total coverage, many of the physical and human processes we study in geography can be comprehended at a planetary level. Using this perception of what ‘global’ means it is possible to understand the exact notion of interdependence. This concept allows us to recognize the scale of spatial interactions between local and global processes. Nevertheless, it is only possible to reach the whole meaning of interdependence at its highest level of analysis of things, events, and people when we recognize the presence of vulnerability and responsibility. The former extensively analyzed by Watts and Bohle (1993) outline space and shape of vulnerability as given by its social relations when; as examples, food insecurity and hunger are spatially present. The latter clearly demonstrated within anthropogenic climate change that implies a “revolutionary reframing of human-environment relations” (Smith, 2015: 17); a responsibility that geographers have an opportunity to

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

111

respond. Thinking about space relationally is part of the process in ethical and political terms as Massey (2004) adds with responsibility deriving from the relations through which identity is built.

8.2  Pedagogic Device: Actors, Processes and Changes 8.2.1  The Power of the Regulative Discourse The theory of the pedagogic device and the structure of knowledge presented by Bernstein (1971) has been developed and transformed by several other theorists within the context of a ‘social realist’ approach (Muller, 2000; Moore, 2004; Young, 2008; Maton, 2014). As Firth (2018) states by citing Maton and Moore (2010), this ‘social realist’ theoretical position places knowledge as an object; a central point in thinking about education. Consequently, the structure of knowledge is directly related to the structure of production and reproduction of power. To further explain this, it is convenient at this point of the analysis to display a graphic that allows easier interpretation of the pedagogic device and the structure of knowledge (Fig. 8.1). Overall, it summarises the actions that the main actors (state

Fig. 8.1  The pedagogic device and the structure of knowledge

112

O. Muñiz Solari

and educators) play in the process of controlling the production and transformation of knowledge; thus, exerting power over the rest of the pedagogic device. The official curriculum and the examination stipulations controlled by the state and its institutions determine how the production of knowledge takes place through distributive procedures. Similarly, educators in universities, research centers, scientific associations, and publishers (textbook authors) also use distributive procedures to manage the field of production. The structuring of knowledge is described by Bernstein (2000) with special rules to explain the internal and external characteristics of the pedagogic device. According to Bernstein (2000), distributive, recontextualizing and evaluative rules control the process of transformation of knowledge. Production, recontextualisation and reproduction of knowledge are taking place in various combinations and through interrelations within the pedagogic device. It is necessary to clarify that if we follow Maton’s reasoning (2014) in a reformulated version of the pedagogic device it will not be seen in this study as a deterministic system as presented by Bernstein (2000). Logics instead of rules control the process of recontextualisation. Therefore, distributive logics are influencing not only the pedagogic practice but also the entire educational knowledge. Thus, the educational knowledge is transformed by the field of pedagogic practice as well. Lilliedahl (2015) adds his interpretation of a reconceptualised curriculum and pedagogy (pedagogy identified as ‘didactic’) as two interrelated types of recontextualising practices. Both (curricular and pedagogic) having their respective logics. Regulative discourse and instructional discourse regulate the process of recontextualisation, as described by Bernstein (1990, 2000). Regulative discourse is determined and constructed by values and prescriptive social conceptions. Instructional discourse is characterized by pedagogic practices. Ultimately, Bernstein (2000) considers the pedagogic discourse as the only active and dynamic component in the transformation of knowledge. Even when the regulative discourse represents the production and transformation of knowledge for the purpose of acquisition in schools, only the pedagogic practices generate conditions for the reproduction of knowledge.

8.2.2  The Dynamic of the Instructional Discourse It has been stated that the focus of this study is on the instructional discourse. Given the nature of lower-division courses in geography, such as World Geography, we can expect increasing variation of the instructional discourse. The university environment concentrates undergraduate students with far more life experience and conceptual skills than children in schools; the typical learners and educational environment in which instructional discourse has been built by social realist theorists. Consequently, pedagogic practices developed with undergraduate students in four-year college and university settings are evidently more conducive to development of instructional discourse.

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

113

Firth (2018) points out that the scrutiny given to the field of recontextualisation or reproduction is inexistent in comparison to the field of knowledge production of academic disciplines. Indeed, the socio-epistemic perspectives presented by the social realist theorists are mostly concentrated in the knowledge structure of academic disciplines themselves. Even when the pedagogic discourse is to some extent determined by prescriptive values, right of way and social conceptions derived from two epistemic communities (state and educators), there is ample space to reproduce knowledge as part of the instructional discourse. Therefore, this chapter provides some insight into new teaching and learning procedures developed with undergraduate students which allow them special capabilities to recontextualise and reproduce geographical knowledge. The dynamic of the instructional discourse can evidently change whether the epistemic communities (state and educators) reduce their intervention and control over the practice of pedagogy or the community in general has a more important role in helping to recontextualise geographical knowledge. First, the reduction of intervention or ‘policy fractures’ from the state (official curriculum, examination stipulations), as interpreted by Davies and Hughes (2009) in their study of government, failure to intervene efficiently (ideological fracture) in education, paves the way for the reduction of adoption of official curriculum by the teachers. Lambert and Walshe (2018) point out the lack of consistency at the level of values and of curriculum expectations between the states of Georgia and Colorado to learn World Geography. Furthermore, ‘policy fractures’ affect the educators (university departments, professional associations in geography, textbook authors) as a result of their inability to send out consistent production of knowledge. As an example of inconsistent production of knowledge among entities of this second epistemic community, Lambert and Walshe (2018) describe the collaborative effort of professional associations for geography in the US that have produced 18 content standards for the schools, yet provide no explicit reference to ‘the global’ within these standards. The set of circumstances explained above has had an important effect and consequence in the pedagogical environment of World Geography courses. First, the increasing transformation of the instructional discourse. Second, the increasing inclusion of a ‘general community’ as a third actor in the pedagogic practice. Figure  8.2 shows the transformation of the pedagogic device in which epistemic entities (state and educators) are being affected and reduces their intervention because of policy fractures. Meanwhile, external communities have advanced in their indirect and almost invisible intervention over the pedagogic practice and the instructional landscape. They are represented by the information and communication technology and its massive amount of information freely available to students. As a result, the whole pedagogic device is focusing on the instructional discourse. The instructional discourse is often understood as characterized by the traditional teacher-student relationships marked by the fact that the teacher has structural power while the student has less by virtue of the assumed role (Quinn et al., 2019). The process of teaching by transmission and learning by acquisition is progressively altered when the ‘teacher-centred pedagogy’ moves toward a ‘learner-centred pedagogy’. However, it is convenient to clarify that in the former pedagogy the

114

O. Muñiz Solari

Fig. 8.2  The pedagogic device focusing on the instructional discourse

recontextualisation of knowledge could be driven into what is interpreted by the teacher. On the other hand, if the center of attention in on the learner, the recontextualisation of knowledge might be focalized on the student’s experience taken from ‘life-worlds’ (Maton, 2014). Both pedagogical approaches are present in the World Geography courses; however, the ‘learner-centred pedagogy’ is exercised by the participants as part of informal learning. Informal learning as compared to formal learning, creates a new perspective related to the hierarchical relationship between teachers and learners. This hierarchy needs to be analyzed according to the type of knowledge to be acquired by both actors. Bernstein (1999) distinguishes between esoteric knowledge and mundane knowledge. The first is a vertical type of discourse that systematic ordering principles are necessary for theoretical and conceptual construction. The second is a horizontal type of discourse connected to specific context. In consequence, esoteric knowledge is the fundamental type of discourse because it cannot be initially based on student experiences. Accordingly, when referring to intrinsic relations within didactics or pedagogies, Lilliedahl (2015) states that social realism reminds us that there must be hierarchy and the presence of a teacher who maintains the school system alive through the pedagogic practice. Traditional instructors have been transformed to become facilitators of knowledge acquisition as a result of the learner-centred pedagogy combined with informal learning. This conversion is based on the new dynamic of the instructional discourse that has been influenced by an overwhelming information and communication technology. Muñiz et al. (2020) citing Healy and Jenkins (2000) point out that formal

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

115

and informal learning are not prioritized, but there are evidences that the latter has gained more adepts thanks to web-based platforms and easier accessibility to information technology. Muñiz Solari and Jiang (2020) add that informal settings bring a new challenge when participants use technologies and grow together in online learning communities via timely informal learning. Informal learning that complements traditional formal learning creates a transformation in the instructional discourse in the World Geography courses. The ‘every day’ knowledge or mundane knowledge that the students bring to the class through informal learning is increasingly important because it needs to be contrasted and complemented with the esoteric knowledge presented by the facilitator. Any pedagogic practice requires method, strategies, and tools. Particularly in the case of an instructional discourse that has a formal learning approach combined with informal learning, the requirements have special conditions. The use of a hybrid teaching and learning method identified as Blended Learning (BL) that is operated with a problem-based learning (PBL) approach is an adequate choice. BL is recognized as a hybrid teaching and learning method that combines face-to-face activities in traditional room settings and online activities normally residing in a Learning Management System (LMS) or digital platform that can contain portals (George-Walker & Keefe, 2010). It has been considered a very efficient way to teach at the university level (Paechter & Maier, 2010) and one important factor is that it is considered to be efficient for courses with large group of students that differ in cultural background, linguistic proficiencies and learning interests, among others (Okaz, 2015). Large-sized undergraduate courses always present a challenge to any instructor as well as benefits. Kenney and Newcombe (2011) presented some strategies to develop BL with large classes such as splitting the larger sections into small groups and close monitoring online activities. Golightly (2018) shows results of increasing self-direct learning within and integrated PBL environment where traditional teaching is combined with online PBL.  He encourages the implementation of PBL in larger class sizes in different subject groups. An instructional discourse with a pedagogic practice that contains methods, strategies and tools is neither complete nor efficient with only generic skills and learning outcomes. It is important to manipulate meta-concepts and other associated concepts in geography which are organized to examine and explain geographical phenomena. In other words, the subject knowledge is the primary objective. When students are exposed to world issues in courses such World Geography the subject knowledge has a very important role to play. Otherwise, students would not be capable to think beyond the limits of their own experience, as Young (2009) argues when he analyses the importance of the subject knowledge in the schools.

116

O. Muñiz Solari

8.3  Practising Powerful Knowledge in World Geography 8.3.1  The Setting and Teaching Environment The infrastructure available at Texas State University to the student is composed of an amphitheater that houses 100 students. The official Texas State Learning Management System for synchronous and asynchronous interaction allows students to be connected to internet permanently. The first learning environment represents a face-to-face instructional approach with two weekly sessions of 120 minutes each. Lectures and practices are developed with various technological resources. During lecture time (one session weekly) the students learn about the different regions of the world systematically. The second session of each week is devoted to practices in order to discuss specific geographical problems and their possible solutions. The second learning environment is based on a special portal that contains several functions such as resources, calendar, forum, chat room, and wiki. The students receive guides, special documents and have access to databases and international sources. Registered undergraduate students come from various disciplines representing a wide variety of majors and minors, but approximately 20 percent are pre-service teachers in social science and near 5 percent are geography majors. Every year, international students and native students with international experience fluctuate between 15 and 20 percent of the class. This variety of majors, minors, and personal experiences brings positive conditions that enhance the instructional process practiced with BL. This learning method has been a successful pedagogic practice for five consecutive years in a World Geography course. The students’ attributes described above were important factors in the selection of a sample to use for this study. Other characteristics are equally important. First, there is a good presence of several disciplines working with geographical issues and problems. Second, a great number of students has benefited from interaction with classmates who are international or have been exposed to international experiences. Finally, the language proficiency besides English allows numerous students to access more extensive digital information; thus, contributing to expand the level of knowledge for the whole class.

8.3.2  Practical Experience on the Subject Knowledge A practical experience was designed to measure the level of assimilation of the subject knowledge once the students completed the World Geography course. The experience was conducted by selecting geographical problems that required analysis with meta-concepts and other associated concepts. The study was projected to verify if the students would be able to think beyond the limit of their former experience obtained during the development of the course. Eventually, it was an observation about the exercise of powerful geography knowledge and their ability to see interdependence.

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

117

Table 8.1  Selected types of knowledge

From the total student population (92) attending and completing the program of the World Geography course a sample size equivalent to 41 students was obtained which was composed of 28 women and 13 men. They represent 45 percent of the total population in which students with majors and minors in interdisciplinary studies, international studies and geography are the majority, followed by political science, sociology, public relations, history and biology. According to the above description the sample was considered a good representation of the total population. The application of a self-selection sampling allowed the participants to be part of this study according to their interest in the study. The total population (92 cases) were eligible to participate and no rejection was performed. The experience was performed through the application of a survey. The instrument was organized in three sections. The students responded to questions in the first section related to the use of meta-concepts (place, space, environment). The second section involved the students in processing physical, representational, and mental abstractions. Finally, the third section guided them to operate general knowledge beyond the limit of their own experiences.

8.3.3  Processing Geographical Concepts Following Maude’s typology (Maude, 2015, 2016) three types of knowledge were selected to test undergraduate students’ abilities to develop and master powerful geographical knowledge. First, Type 1 or knowledge that provides students with ‘new ways of thinking about the world.’ Then, Type 2 or knowledge that provides students with powerful ways of analyzing, explaining, and understanding. Finally, Type 5 or knowledge of the world that is beyond the students’ experience. Table 8.1 shows and adaptation of the chosen types with the associated concepts and processing levels.

118

O. Muñiz Solari

Table 8.2  Knowledge Type 1 – Meta-concept: Place

Given the fact that Maude’s typology was proposed for young children in a school environment, two types (3 and 4) were not selected because the conditions for these types of knowledge to work are not applicable to undergraduate students in four-year college or university environments. Specifically, type 3 was excluded because undergraduate students exposed to this experience have some level of intellectual maturity and the necessary ability to use information compared to school children. Maude’s Type 3 represents the knowledge that gives young pupils some independence to find their own information to resolve a problem. Type 4 was also excluded because there is no need for the undergraduate students to participate in debates in this instance. Maude’s Type 4 represents knowledge that enables young pupils to participate in local and national debates. 8.3.3.1  Knowledge Type 1 The enquiry process started with the first meta-concept (place). The selection of an earthquake as a physical phenomenon among other earth dynamics presented a good example of characteristics, problems and the uniqueness of places affected by geological and geomorphological transformations. Table 8.2 shows three places the students needed to localise, analyse, explain and generalise to demonstrate their levels of geographical thinking. This is a process of reaching an explanation, thinking about strategies for solutions and address the problems observed in three different places. The enquiry was complemented with two questions: 1 . Could you explain similarities and differences if you compare these places? 2. One of the concepts associated to the concept of ‘earthquake’ is ‘tectonic plate’ What other geographic concepts are associated to the concept of ‘earthquake’? (Prepare a list).

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

119

Table 8.3  Knowledge Type 1 – Meta-concept: Space

The enquiry process continued with the next meta-concept (space). The selection of migration as human phenomenon among other social dynamics presented a good example of characteristics, problems and the uniqueness of spaces affected by population movements and spatial distributions. Table 8.3 shows three places the students must conceptualise, analyse, explain and generalise to demonstrate their levels of geographical thinking. This is a process of reaching an explanation and thinking about flows to discover patterns and address the problems observed in three different interconnected places. The enquiry was complemented with two questions: 1 . Could you explain similarities and differences if you compare these spaces? 2. One of the concepts associated to the concept of ‘migration’ is ‘chain migration.’ What other geographic concepts are associated to the concept of ‘migration’? (Prepare a list). The first section of the survey was completed with the third meta-concept (environment). The selection of nuclear radiation as an environmental phenomenon, among other environmental issues, presented a good example of the uniqueness of the environmental issue, yet with the possibility of affecting not only the locality but also extensive areas of nature and human population. Table 8.4 shows three places that needed to be conceptualized, analyzed, explained, and possibly generalized to reach new ways of geographical thinking. This is a process of reaching an explanation and thinking about diffusion to discover patterns and address the problems observed in three different locations and their affected areas. The enquiry was complemented with two questions: 1. Could you explain similarities and differences if you compare these locations and areas? 2. One of the concepts associated to the concept of ‘nuclear radiation’ is ‘nuclear fission.’ What other geographic concepts are associated to the concept of ‘‘nuclear radiation”? (Prepare a list).

120

O. Muñiz Solari

Table 8.4  Knowledge Type 1 – Meta-concept: Environment

8.3.3.2  Knowledge Type 2 Once the students completed their work on meta-concepts (place, space and environment) the process of acquiring powerful knowledge must be reached through the use and application of ‘geographical abstractions’. Banfield (2016: 83) writes: “The nature and function of abstractions is attracting renewed and critical attention in geography at present with disciplinary tendencies being rethought and reframed.” As a matter of clarification, the importance of geographical abstraction is not the degree to which it describes the world, but how it moves people to think differently about what is possible within the world (McCormack, 2012). As McCormack argues by citing Lefebre’s work (1991) abstractions can be accepted as a technique of thinking that replaces the empirical experience in order to generate an extra-­ experiential generalisation. It is a process of recontextualisation. Analytical concepts, explanatory concepts and generalisations can be mastered through geographical abstractions. The processing of information via geographical abstractions help the students to recontextualise knowledge. Consequently, the students were exposed to different geographical abstractions. This was required to advance from knowledge acquisition thinking and process thinking to metacognitive thinking, experiencing different levels of reality (physical, representational, and mental) along a learning line. Figure 8.3 shows the learning line A-B as a function of developing metacognition once each student acquires knowledge at the physical level, then operating information through representations (percepts at the internal level) and pictures, photos, maps; among other representations, at the external level. The second section of the survey was completed with progressive thinking levels to capture physical reality, representational and mental levels. In other words, the exposure to progressive levels of geographical abstraction facilitates a better comprehension of both geographical concepts and geographical processes. For this purpose, the students were introduced to the problem of water stress that takes place in

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

121

Fig. 8.3 Thinking levels and levels of reality. (Adapted from Kimball (2014), based on Wirtz (1980))

various conditions and by different factors in several regions of the world. Next, each student selected all the descriptions (physical abstractions) that represented water stress. After that, each student selected all the images (photographs) as representational abstractions that describe water stress. Finally, two imagined descriptions were created by each student to develop mental abstractions of water stress. The reason for two descriptions is based on a possible comparison and verification of the level of mental abstraction reached by the student. Table 8.5 shows a summarized example of the codification system utilized by each student to select codes that identify physical and representational abstractions. In order to easy the process of identification each student was exposed to a predefined codification system that classified different descriptions (P-1 to P-30) and images (I-1 to I-30) for the physical and representational procedures, respectively. The imagined descriptions were not codified. 8.3.3.3  Knowledge Type 5 The completion of the experience that resembles and covers two of Maude’s types [Type 1 and 2] of powerful knowledge takes the students to the third section of the survey. The students then perform geographical analyses that are unrelated to current events or issues yet charged with projections that normally exceed the students’ experience about the world they know. It is about interconnectedness and ultimately discovering and revealing interdependence. Therefore, Type 5 of powerful knowledge is performed. The survey introduces two important concepts: ‘water stress’ and ‘water scarcity.’ Figure 8.4 gives a general overview of these two important concepts in geography. They represent a good example of complex combination of problems in physical and human geography. By adding a second concept (water scarcity) the

122

O. Muñiz Solari

Table 8.5  Event: Water stress. Geographical abstractions

Fig. 8.4  Conditions for water stress and water scarcity in the world. (Adapted from Schulte, 2014)

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

123

students are confronted with a new level of thinking that takes them beyond the limit of their own experiences in geography. During lectures and practices in World Geography the students discussed the problem of water in the world and learned how to recognize and differentiate water stress and water scarcity in different regions. However, only the students of this study developed a more in-depth analysis of these concepts to project physical and human interrelations. The students were confronted with a new level of thinking that took them beyond the limit of their own experiences in geography. The final practice for the students who took the survey was to observe and analyze interdependence; an opportunity to explore and describe the complex interactions of the earth’s system processes. Initially, the students were exposed to a sequential processing for understanding basic components and integrating information related to the Earth’s hydrosphere. Subsequently, they detected issues of inequality in different geographical settings due to water stress. For instance, social inequality was discussed for population affected by lack of infrastructure or excessive pollution (quality), ability to buy water (affordability), and excessive distance to water sources or because of war zone limitation (accessibility). After that, they were asked to identify interconnections between water stress and water scarcity and determine examples in different regions to discover complex interrelations. The final task was to observe population vulnerability due to water stress and water scarcity. This open discussion was devoted to identifying the level of responsibility over the use of water under conditions of scarcity and stress.

8.4  Results and Discussion The information collected from the survey shows interesting results. The selection of three geographical phenomena (i.e., earthquake, migration and nuclear radiation) to be used as tokens in the process of discovering what is inside some concepts or, in other words, the intrinsic dimension of conceptualisation, paved the way to attempt an original approach to explore powerful knowledge. The application of the survey related to the use of concepts to understand the world (Type 1) shows these results. Recognizing the multiplicity of dimensions that place, space and environment can offer the selected strategy to open some of the dimensions worked well. Place offered no difficulty in its interpretation since most of the participants in this survey handled the first meta-concept quite well. The application of the earthquake phenomenon to different locations allowed students a good perception of place. Using specific locations where earthquakes frequently occur almost all the students understood and distinguished various outcomes of these events, yet their responses to indicate strategies (solutions) to reduce the effect on people were less precise. Correct interpretations for outcomes and strategies were made by 40 students (97 percent) and 26 students (63 percent), respectively (Table 8.6-A, characteristics 1 and 2).

124

O. Muñiz Solari

Space presented less encouraged results compared to the first meta-concept. Only 34 students out of 41 understood the conditions related to migration processes in three different spaces. Despite this evidence, 72 percent understood migration flow patterns quite well. It is fair to say that the interpretation of space by more than 50 percent of the students was adequate, although problems relating to scale and border issues created some confusion with regard to interpreting space (Table 8.6-­ A, characteristics 3 and 4). Environment resulted in a complex meta-concept when the students had to analyse three areas of the world where nuclear radiation occurred in the past. Impacts and diffusion patterns were difficult to handle. Consequently, this less common environmental phenomenon compared to other phenomena (e.g., pollution, chemical spills, deforestation) which are very common in a variety of geographical spaces, caused some misunderstanding. Responses were less effective and precise. Only 26 students (64 percent) dealt with the issue of nuclear radiation impacts. Even a more reduced number of participants (23 cases representing 57 percent) managed to grasp the diffusion process (Table 8.6-A, characteristics 5 and 6). The students did not show evidence of difficulty in recognizing and using concepts to explain place, space and environment. Of all the descriptions, only those developed to explain the environmental processes associated to nuclear radiation showed some deficiency to manipulate associated concepts (Table 8.6-B). However, Table 8.6  Summary of results from the survey

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

125

several students were able to determine special associated concepts to migration and nuclear radiation that represent critical issues concerning inequality and the presence of vulnerability (see highlighted words under SPACE in relation to migration [displaced person, oppression and persecution]). Some of the responses using geographical abstractions clearly demonstrated that the analysis at the physical level was more precise than working with the representational level of reality. Table  8.6-C shows that 36 participants, equivalent to 89 percent, gave correct answers for events that represent water stress, while the percentage of participants identifying geographical representations of similar concept was reduced to 81. However, the latter evidences an interest and better explanations due to the use of images. On the contrary, the number of participants using correct mental explanation through imagined descriptions was smaller than the preceding levels (26 students representing 64 percent). It is worth noting that the line of learning in terms of thinking levels is not continuous. Some students have shown erratic movement in their acquisition of knowledge when trying to reach the metacognition stage. One possible cause of this anomaly is the deficient background the students have in science since the great majority are taking social science courses. Although the detailed survey did yield lengthy explanations on water stress and water scarcity by some students it was noticed that the students’ abilities to deal with interactions raised some questions. Overall, the results point toward some weakness. Interrelations were well developed by no more than 22 students (53 percent) when they looked for spatial relations to identify interconnection. Furthermore, interdependence was a more difficult concept, yet some students managed to perform with some success not only to understand some relationships between local and global physical processes but also human and cultural processes. Forty-seven percent of the students were able to identify good elements and components of global dynamics (Table 8.6-D). Nonetheless, the ability to deal with complex interactions between phenomena and processes that are part of the hydrosphere, atmosphere, and biosphere, among others, is still rudimentary. Social and economic interrelations were even more difficult to grasp. At this point, it is hard to judge whether such weakness is part of previous weak education or a result of more recent formal learning and informal learning during undergraduate studies, including World Geography.

8.5  Conclusion The final part of this chapter considers advantages and disadvantages of this experience and the possibility for further research to look more in-depth at exercises of exploring powerful geographical knowledge. Three different ways of building powerful knowledge by undergraduate students learning world geography have been presented. Even when these focused on a very localized academic environment there was important value to be recognized. It constitutes one of the few applied experiences, if any other exist at the present time, to

126

O. Muñiz Solari

demonstrate the way powerful geography should be practiced with undergraduate students. Nevertheless, two questions need to be answered. Do the students have enough preparation to deal with interconnection? Were the previous exercises about knowledge Type 1 and Type 2 adequate to prepare students when dealing with the complex concept of interdependence? Most of the students who take an introductory course in geography in American universities, such as World Geography, have the first systematic experience in geography. In view of that fact, it is acceptable to conclude that any limited success should be considered a good indication for future better results. There is still some work to be done to facilitate new generations in building global awareness and global perception of place, space and environment as well as their complex interconnections. Whilst undergraduate students are being exposed to new ways of teaching and learning, no method was designed to exercise powerful geography by itself. Any methods, especially those that open the doors to confront problems, such as problem-based learning and project-based learning, require special strategies to deal with powerful knowledge. By the same token, new strategies to manage meta-­ concepts in geography would seem to be critical so as to be conducive to exercising more powerful geographical knowledge. Interdependence is built through awareness of complex physical and human interactions that we can first understand by separating and analyzing individual components of the Earth’s systems. Here, the exercises about knowledge Type 1 and Type 2 developed by the students have critical importance. It is necessary to consider whether these exercises were adequate to prepare students for observation and description of interdependences or if more work needs to be done. Two answers can be presented for this consideration. The first response is positive. The exercises were well designed because the students were able to follow the paths of enquiry with minimum external intervention. The second response is tentative and suggests the need for more in-depth work. A plausible explanation has to do with the selection of phenomena being investigated to understand geography’s major concepts. Perhaps, a different selection might provide better ways to understand these meta-­ concepts. In any case, the complexity that brings interdependence requires to master global dynamics. In order to reach that level of spatial analysis any student must first walk through some intricate passageways to fully understand and grasp how interrelations work in our world.

References Banfield, J. (2016). Geography meets Gendlin: An exploration of disciplinary potential through artistic practice. Springer. Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education (pp.  47–69). MacMillan. Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge.

8  Practising Powerful Geographical Knowledge to Understand Interdependence

127

Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourses: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157–173. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique. Rowman and Littlefield. Boehm, R., Solem, M., & Zadrozny, J. (2018). The rise of powerful geography. The Social Studies, 109(2), 125–135. Catling, S., & Martin, F. (2011). Contesting powerful knowledge: The primary geography curriculum as an articulation between academic and children’s ethno-geographies. The Curriculum Journal, 22, 317–335. Davies, P., & Hughes, J. (2009). The fractured arms of government and the premature end of lifelong learning. Journal of Educational Policy, 24(5), 595–610. Fargher, M. (2018). WebGIS for geography education: Towards a geocapabilities approach. International Journal of Geo-Information, 7(111), 1–15. Firth, R. (2011). Debates about knowledge and the curriculum: Some implications for geography education. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography education and the future (pp. 141–164). Continuum International Publishing Group. Firth, R. (2013). What constitute knowledge in geography? In D.  Lambert & M.  Jones (Eds.), Debates in geography education (pp. 59–74). Routledge. Firth, R. (2018). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M. Jones & D. Lamberts (Eds.), Debates in geography education (pp. 275–286). Routledge. George-Walker, L., & Keefe, M. (2010). Self-determined blended learning: A case study of blended learning design. Higher Education Research and Development, 29, 1–13. Golightly, A. (2018). The influence of an integrated PBL format on geography students’ perceptions of their self-directedness in learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42(3), 460–478. Healy, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Learning cycles and learning styles: Kolb’s experiential learning theory and its application in geography in higher education. Journal of Geography, 99, 185–195. Hopkin, J., & Kitchen, R. (2018). Geography, global citizenship and global learning in the UK. In A. Demirci, R. de Miguel Gonzalez, & S. Bednarz (Eds.), Global education for global understanding (pp. 193–203). Springer. Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2011). Adopting a blended learning approach: Challenges encountered and lessons learned in an action research study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1), 47–59. Kimball, T. (2014). Sequencing learning events. In The competent instructor. Retrieved from www.knowbiz.biz/tci/learner_guide/sequencing_learning.pdf Lambert, D. (2011). Reviewing the case for geography, and the ‘knowledge turn’ in the English National Curriculum. Curriculum Journal, 22, 234–264. Lambert, D. (2014). Curriculum thinking, “capabilities” and the place of geographical knowledge in schools. Syakaika Kenkyu. Journal of Educational Research on Social Studies, 81, 1–11. Lambert, D., Solem, M., & Tani, S. (2015). Achieving human potential through geography education: A capabilities approach to curriculum making in schools. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 105(4), 723–735. Lambert, D., & Walshe, N. (2018). How geography curricula tackle global issues. In A. Demirci, R. de Miguel Gonzalez, & S.  Bednarz (Eds.), Global education for global understanding (pp. 83–96). Springer. Lefebre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell. Lilliedahl, J. (2015). The recontextualization of knowledge: Towards a social realist approach to curriculum and didactics. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 1(27008), 40–47. Massey, D. (2004). Geographies of responsibility. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 86(1), 5–18. Massey, D. (2014). Taking on the world. Geography, 99(1), 36–39. Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge.

128

O. Muñiz Solari

Maton, K., & Moore, R. (2010). Social realism, knowledge and the sociology of education: Coalitions of the mind. Continuum. Maude, A. (2015). What is powerful knowledge and can it be found in the Australian geography curriculum? Geographical Education, 28, 18–26. Maude, A. (2016). What might powerful geographical knowledge look like? Geography, 101(2), 70–76. McCormack, D. (2012). Geography and abstraction: Toward an affirmative critique. Progress in Human Geography, 36(6), 715–734. Moore, R. (2004). Education and society: Issues and explanations in the sociology of education. Polity Press. Morgan, J. (2011). Knowledge and the school geography curriculum: A rough guide for teachers. Teaching Geography, 36, 90–92. Morgan, J. (2015). Michael Young and the politics of the curriculum. British Journal of Education Studies, 63, 5–22. Muller, J. (2000). Reclaiming knowledge: Social theory, curriculum and education policy. Routledge-Falmer. Muñiz Solari, O. (2018). Preparing global citizens in the United States. In A. Demirci, R. de Miguel Gonzalez, & S.  Bednarz (Eds.), Global education for global understanding (pp.  205–213). Springer. Muñiz Solari, O., & Jiang, L. (2020). The Shanghai model for global geography education. In J. Calvo de Mora & K. Kennedy (Eds.), School and informal learning in a knowledge-based world (pp. 99–118). Routledge. Okaz, A. (2015). Integrating blended learning in higher education. Procedia  – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 600–603. Paechter, M., & Maier, B. (2010). Online of face-to-face? student’s experiences and preferences in e-learning. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 292–297. Quinn, L., & Vorster, J. (2016). Pedagogy for foster criticality, reflectivity and praxis in a course on teaching for lecturers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(7), 1100–1113. Quinn, L., Behari-Leak, K., Ganas, R., Olsen, A.-M., & Vorster, J.-A. (2019). Reflecting on feedback processes for new ways of knowing, being and acting. International Journal for Academic Development, 24(4), 330–341. Roberts, M. (2014). Powerful knowledge and geographical education. The Curriculum Journal, 25, 187–209. Schulte, P. (2014). Defining water scarcity, water stress, and water risk. Pacific Institute, Oakland, California. Retrieved from https://pacinst.org/water-­definitions/ Solem, M., Lambert, D., & Tani, S. (2013). Geocapabilities: Toward an international framework for researching the purposes and values of geography education. RIGEO, 3(3), 214–229. Smith, J. (2015). Geographies of interdependence. Geography, 100(1), 12–19. Watts, M., & Bohle, H. (1993). The space of vulnerability: The causal structure of hunger and famine. Progress in Human Geography, 17(1), 43–67. White, J. (2018). The weakness of ‘powerful knowledge’. London Review of Education, 16(2), 325–335. Wirtz, R. (1980). An elementary mathematics curriculum for all children. Curriculum Development Associates. Young, M. (2008). From constructivism to realism in the sociology of the curriculum. Review of Research in Education, 32, 1–32. Young, M. (2009). Education, globalization and the “voice of knowledge”. Journal of Education and Work, 22, 193–204. Young, M. (2015, September 1). Unleashing the power of knowledge for all [Monograph]. Retrieved from www.spiked-­online.com/newsite/article/unleashing-­the-­power-­of-­knowledge-­for-­all/17374#

Chapter 9

Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning in Geography Classes Pola Serwene

9.1  The Processes of Recontextualisation Recontextualisation is interpreted in this chapter as “the principle that governs the way in which knowledge is selected from the field in which it was produced and transformed for the purpose of acquisition in schools” (Firth, 2017: 279). This study looks at how the processes of contextualisation and decontextualisation between the geographical concepts and geographical contexts can influence students’ disciplinary knowledge (see Fig. 9.1) (Firth, 2017: 278; Demuth et al., 2005: 59; Fögele, 2016: 59). In Fig.  9.1, disciplinary knowledge is both situated knowledge (geographical contexts) and systematic knowledge building (concepts of the discipline). The process of contextualisation gives the geographical concept a meaningful context. The process of decontextualisation generalises the geographical context. The specificities of the contexts are systematised by analysing similarities and differences. The components of the geographical concepts shown in the diagram have been added to Demuth’s conceptual framework (2005: 59). Detaching geographical conceptual learning from geographical contexts can lead to less depth in knowledge and understanding. Geographical ideas such as diversity, development or change need to be contextualised to demonstrate the multidimensional nature, depth, and breadth of these concepts (Lambert, 2013).

P. Serwene (*) Institute of Environmental Science and Geography, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_9

129

130

P. Serwene

Fig. 9.1  Processes of contextualisation and decontextualisation adapted from Demuth et al., 2005 and Fögele, 2016

9.2  Study Design and Methods The process of recontextualisation presented in this chapter formed part of a Design-­ Based-­Research (DBR) study which took place in a tenth grade bilingual geography class in a secondary school in Berlin, Germany, during the school year 2016/17. The research question that guided the study was: How can teaching the geographical concept of change be designed to contribute to the construction of powerful disciplinary knowledge?

A set of key characteristics define DBR studies including the following: they are situated in real educational contexts, focus on the design and testing of interventions, use mixed methods, involve multiple iterations, stem from partnerships between researchers and practitioners, yield design principles and are concerned with an impact on practice (Anderson & Shattuck, 2012: 16; Plomp, 2007: 13). Figure  9.3 illustrates how these characteristics are implemented in this research study starting with the definition of the problem and the aim of the study. Based on design principles, learning environments were developed, tested, and evaluated in two interventions (Fig. 9.2). Germany’s geography didactics require more conceptual learning and less content-­based learning in geography lessons. However, concrete implementation principles and guidelines for teachers how to foster conceptual thinking are missing. This DBR-study aims at addressing this important gap between theory and school practice. In iterative cycles, it sets out to test, and adjust design principles to improve the geographical learning environment. This DBR study therefore aims to echo Firth’s claim on recontextualising knowledge that: “Attention needs to be given […] to the idea that it may be useful to view the recontextualisation and acquisition of knowledge as being concerned with the way in which different epistemic communities relate with each other, rather than to focus upon how one form of knowledge relates with another” (Firth, 2011: 310).

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

131

Fig. 9.2  Study design adopted by Euler, 2014; Euler & Reinmann, 2017

Firth’s claim of recontextualising knowledge was used during the design of the learning environment which was developed in a researcher-practitioner-cooperation which tested the intervention and generated the theoretical and school-relevant outputs. On the one hand, the results provide a demonstrable added value to the design of teachinglearning processes; on the other hand, DBR attempts to formulate area-­specific theories that fit into a broader context (Euler, 2014: 18). Especially, the process of operationalising design principles (see Table 9.4) helps to delocalise these design principles from the interventions and makes them compliable to further learning environments. The disciplinary knowledge taught in the DBR lessons was focused on changing places, namely Idomeni, Greece in the 1st intervention which took place in September 2016, and the RAW area in Berlin in the 2nd intervention which was carried out in February 2017. Each intervention consisted of a unit of six lessons à 45 min. The lessons were taught via team-teaching between the class teacher and the researcher. Four pairs of students were videoed to record their actions and conversations. To determine the learners’ ability to apply the geographical concepts of change, the students were asked to write an analysis of the changes occurring in a place using the components of change shown in Fig. 2.1. The collected data was analysed using a qualitative content analysis suggested by Kuckartz (2016: 117). The code scheme used to analyse the video transcripts was developed inductively from the data, whereby the students’ texts were evaluated by applying a pre-existing code scheme consisting of the components of the geographical concept (see Sects. 9.1 and 9.4 for detail).

132

P. Serwene

9.3  Concepts in Geography Education Brooks (2013: 76) categorised three dimensions of concepts in learning settings. First, teachers use concepts to develop geographical learning environments (Brooks, 2013: 80). In this case, concepts help to group the subject matter into more manageable units enabling us to communicate about a complex world (Taylor, 2008: 54). Teachers are the key agents in this process of recontextualisation. Second, organisational concepts can be used as a tool for developing geographical understanding (Brooks, 2017: 106). Third, concerning the learner’s perspective, geographical concepts function as “a subject-specific lens for a systematic analysis of geographical issues” (Fögele & Mehren, 2015: 63). The key geographical concept in this study is change. It is used as a ‘subject specific lens’ to focus on the analysis of geographical issues in the two case study areas of Idomeni, Greece and the RAW area in Berlin. Understanding the geographical concept of change in this study was underpinned by Taylor’s definition of her organising concept ‘change’ (2008: 51). Taylor (2008: 51) defines change as the driver within physical and human geography and sees a strong connection between time and change. A crucial aspect of this idea is the element of managing change (Taylor, 2008: 51). We considered also Dodgshon’s taxonomy of societal change and Rost’s findings on humans’ perception of change (1998: 21; 2014: 97). Dodghon’s ideas refer to the components ‘morphology’ and ‘process’; Rost’s ideas also investigate the component of ‘morphology’. Seven components of the geographical concept of change were identified in total. These were time, morphology, materiality, process, distance, function of the place and agents (see Table 9.1) (Serwene, 2017: 269). Table 9.1  Components of the geographical concept ‘change’ adapted from Serwene, 2017; Taylor, 2008 Leading questions around the concept of change Components of the concept of (some of the questions of the components time and morphology are taken from Taylor) change Time How and why has it been different in the past? How might it be different in the future? (prediction) Which of the different future paths are more/less desirable? Morphology What has the nature, rate and extent of change been like? Did the change take place over a short or long period of time? Was it a regular or an irregular change? Can you identify sudden changes or up- and downward trends? Materiality What did it look like in the past? How does it look like today? Can you identify a sense of place? Process What are the reasons for the change? What kind of effects followed? Can you identify important events? Distance How does the change in this place influence other places? How is the change in this place influenced by other places? Function How did the function of the place change?

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

133

The time component refers to the reference points of past, present and future and defines the period of change. The morphology defines the ‘how’ of the changing process. The morphology of change can be defined by the speed or the dynamic of change. It can be differentiated between a slow, rapid and blatant speed of change (Rost, 2014: 98). The dynamic of change can be unfolded as continuously and appears as a linear curve or observed as a discontinuous trend involving knickpoints and sudden upward/downward surges. The materiality component refers to the sensory perception of change and includes everything visible, audible and tangible in changing places (Serwene, 2017: 268). It includes the idea of a ‘sense of place’ which refers to the way in which a person feels emotionally connected to a place (Brooks & Morgan, 2006: 27). An important part of the concept of change is the aspect of transformation processes, which can be examined by looking at cause-­ and-­effect relations. Thereby the source of change (cause) and the product of change (effect) play a central role (Dodgshon, 1998: 29). When we look at changing places, rapid changes can alter the function of a place. This component is called the function of the place. Distance is another possible reference point to describe changes, and especially the influence of the transformation process on other places. Another important part is the agents who influence and trigger changes. In human geographical contexts, agents play a central role. An analysis of their actions helps to predict possible future trends of the on-going changes.

9.3.1  C  hanging Places Case Studies: Idomeni in Greece and RAW Area in Berlin The Greek village Idomeni was chosen as geographical context of the 1st intervention and the RAW area in Berlin of the 2nd intervention (Tables 9.2 and 9.3).

Table 9.2  Idomeni – illegal refugee camp in Greece

Components of the concept of change Idomeni was the main border-crossing point on the so-called Western Balkan route. In March 2016, Macedonia fully sealed its border with Greece. A makeshift border camp with 14,000 refugees emerged in Idomeni. Time

Context: Idomeni – main border crossing point becomes illegal refugee camp in Greece

Starting point: Idomeni in 2015 as a small Greek village Present: Makeshift border camp Future: Train station at the end of 2016 (continued)

134

P. Serwene

Table 9.2 (continued)

Components of the concept of change Morphology

Materiality

Process

Distance Function

Agent

Context: Idomeni – main border crossing point becomes illegal refugee camp in Greece The morphology of change can be described as rapid and discontinuous, as the closure of the border happened from one day to the next. The appearance of the place changed. The trains did not operate anymore, tents were built on the tracks and the train station. The amount of people in the place changed massively. (14.000 Pers.) Main effect: Development of the illegal refugee camp in Indomeni Important events: Closure of the border of Macedonia, Slovenia, Hungary, Austria Reasons for the change in Idomeni: The Western Balkan route is the favoured track to reach Central and Northern Europe. The 2013 Dublin III Regulation implies that an asylum seeker needs to apply for asylum in the EU Member State which he/she first reaches. The quality of implementation of the agreed standards from the Common European Asylum System varies widely between EU countries. Greece as a signee of the 1951 refugee convention and a member of the EU. Not relevant. Former function: a transit train station at the Greece-Macedonia border Function during the refugee crisis of 2015/16: EU largest illegal refugee camp The number of refugees play a central role. The governments of Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, Austria and their decisions

Sources: Behrakis, 2015; Chischinger, 2015; Karagiannopoulos & Fronista, 2016; Türk, 2016

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

135

Table 9.3  RAW area in Berlin Context: The RAW area in Berlin – from a safe place to a dangerous zone?

Components of the concept of change This place is characterised by a change from a safe area to a dangerous zone caused by the increase in violent incidences, drug trafficking and excessive clubbing. Time Starting point (since 1990): RAW area as a sociocultural Centre in Friedrichshain Present (2015): The RAW area is Berlin’s party mile with many clubs and bars as well a hotspot of violence and drug trafficking. Future: The raw area in 2030 – Predicting the future trends considering the current cause-effect-relations Morphology The morphology of change can be described as a continuous downward trend until 2015. From then on, the trend remained at a stable negative level including some upward surges. Materiality The sense of security mainly changed. Who feels safe or insecure in which moment at the raw area? Process Main effect: The RAW area is perceived as an insecure place. Reasons for the changes: Violent incidences (visitors were attacked and robbed.) A lot of pickpocketing Countermeasures: Police warned visitors via Facebook against violent attacks and robberies The owner of the RAW invested in better lightening and CCTV The club’s owners hired private security services Permanent police presence at the RAW area Effects: Displacement effects of the drug trafficking to nearby streets Distance Drug trafficking and robberies take place in the nearby streets. The neighbours are massively affected by the parties at the RAW. Function Former function: The RAW area is a socio-cultural Centre Current function: Party mile as well as a hotspot of drug trafficking and robberies Agent Mainly involved are the inhabitants, tourists/visitors, owners of bars, restaurants and clubs in the RAW area, police, politicians, thieves and drug dealers. Sources: Bortels, 2015; Nibbrig, 2017; R.A.W. Team, 2019; Schmalz, 2017; The Local, 2016

136

P. Serwene

Table 9.4  Design principles of the 1st Intervention Design Principles Process of contextualisation and decontextualisation (concept-components-context)

Active learning Visualisation

Implementation principles Introducing the concept change in context The components are used as evaluative tool

Practical teaching ascertainment Starting point is the context Idomeni.

The students are asked to analyse the components in the place Idomeni. The final text involves the evaluation of each component to describe the changes in Idomeni. Time: Sequence of pictures is presented Components conveyed in an Process: Designing a concept map indirect way showing cause-effect-relations of the change Materiality: Visual impulse of the three pictures of Idomeni Introduction of the components using Components conveyed in a direct leading questions (time, materiality, morphology and agents) way Position game – Using statements concerning the components (materiality, time, function and morphology) Question to answer in the final text: What has the process, rate and extent of change in Idomeni been like?” Designing a concept The students structure 19 information map cards to show the process of change Pictures/ video Using three pictures of Idomeni at different times (2015, 3/2016 & 5/2016) Showing a film of the refugee camp in Idomeni

9.4  D  esigning the Intervention Learning Environments (Table 9.4) We argue that the starting point of the process of contextualisation and decontextualisation in the geography lesson is the context. There is no superordinate introduction of the concept change and its components remote from context. To achieve a sense of place and to detect the time sequence of change, the students were given three different pictures of the train station of Idomeni which were taken at three different points in time. Moreover, a current video of the illegal refugee camp, the village and the train station were shown. In the next step, the students were given information cards to use in a concept map. After they examined the changing place, the components of the concept change were introduced as an evaluative tool by

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

137

asking the students questions concerning the components of the concept. The following questions were asked: • Did the change take place over a short or long period of time? (time) • Was it a rapid or slow process of change? (morphology) Was it a regular or an irregular change? (morphology). • When you looked at the pictures what changed mainly for you? (materiality/ function). To further determine the learners’ understanding of changing places and their ability to apply the geographical concepts of change, the students were asked to write an analysis of the changes occurring in the place using the components of the concept as evaluative tools.

9.5  Analysis and Interpretation – 1st Intervention The analysis of the findings is based on the students’ written analysis of the geographical context of the 1st intervention – the changing place Idomeni. The texts are the product of the students’ learning process in the developed learning environment. The results presented are taken from the students’ written products. The re-design of the intervention is founded on both the students’ texts and the analysis of the video transcripts.

9.5.1  Time Sequence of Change Concerning the component time 9 out of 12 students made a statement on the time sequence of the change. Seven students interpreted the time sequence as being short justified by the fact that Macedonia closed its border from one day to the next. Two students evaluated the time sequence of change as long. They reasoned in their statements by considering the future development of Idomeni and argued that so many people are not easily brought to other accommodations. Ella: “I think that the change was over a short period of time but I also think that the problem is a long time trouble because there are so many people without a home.”

9.5.2  Morphology of Change The analysis of the learners’ written products showed that six students (6/12) made a statement about the morphology of change in Idomeni. Most students described the morphology of change in a linkage with time, using terms like ‘rapid’ and ‘slow’. Emilia: “I think it was a rapid process, because Macedonia closed the borders from one day to the next.”

138

P. Serwene

During the geography lessons, terms like ‘regular/irregular’, ‘continuous/discontinuous’, ‘slow/rapid’ were used to describe forms of morphology that occur in changing places. The students’ writings illustrate that these categories are not comprehensible to them as the students do not look at the dynamic of change. Ella: “It was a irregular change because it is not regular that so many people stucked in one place.” Jonas: “I think it was a irregular change because its simple too much at the train station.”

9.5.3  Materiality One third of the students (4/12) made a statement about the changed materiality of the place. The students only used the two given contradictory properties ‘appearance of the place’ and ‘number of people’ as illustrated in the learners’ texts below: Luisa: “I think more the amount of people living have changed because 14 000 people come and before that those were probably not so much people. The appearance of the place were also changed but not so much. The train station are dirty and the people break something, of that the appearance is also changed.”

The students gave reasons based mainly on appearance. Aspects like changing sounds or smells are non-existent in their writings. Ella’s comment shows once more her reliance on the pictures when analysing the materiality of the changing place: Ella: “For me it changes mainly the appearance of the place. So at the first picture nothing special happened there are only a view people and the place look realy quit. At the other picture some weeks later you can see everywhere people who live in tents and it is dirty and the tents are build in mud. The amount of people living there changed too.”

9.5.4  Changed Function of Idomeni Half of the students (6/12) made a judgement about the changed function of Idomeni. Five of them argued that Idomeni lost its function as transit train station. Emilia: “Because of all the refugees the train station couldn’t get used for the reason it got build so it was an irregular change.”

9.5.5  Transformation Process The analysis of the students’ writings reveals that they still had difficulties in describing complex cause-and-effect relations. Six learners (6/12) identify one moment of change which is often the trigger of a transformation process. The closure of the Macedonian border has been identified as the most important moment of

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

139

change. Only four students referred in their argumentation to the mentioned laws (Dublin III Regulation, Refugee Convention and Common European Asylum System) in the information cards. Lina: “And Greece position is in south Europe and a law in Europe say that when refugees are coming to Europe they have to apply for asylum in this country. Therefore, Greece has a big problem with the refugees.”

Even though, the students were asked to illustrate the transformation process in a concept map explaining the relations between the events, causes and effects by using arrows, the written explanations of the transformation process are linear and one-dimensional. For example: Sophia: “A lot of refugees used that way to go to central Europe. But then Macedonia closed their borders and the refugees stuck in Idomeni at the borders.” Ben: “Greek and Macedonia closed their borders so the refugees had to go to Idomeni. 14000 refugees came straight to Idomeni so they had to act quickly. They had to close train station to build refugee camps.”

9.5.6  Agents in the Process of Change All students considered the refugees to have a central role in the transformation process. Four students describe the role of Macedonia as being important. The agents play an inferior position in their analyses.

9.6  Interpretation of Findings The analysis of the components of the geographical concept change shows that the components morphology, materiality and process need a closer interpretation. Concerning the component morphology it can be stated that some students applied the term ‘irregular change’ to say that something is unusual and unexpected. They did not consider the idea of dynamic involving knickpoints and up- and downward trends. Even though half of the students evaluated the morphology of change it differs strongly from the teacher’s interpretation who identified the morphology of change as discontinuous. Consequently, the teacher’s and researcher’s understanding of the morphology of change varied from the students’ concepts. This supports to a degree, Brooks’ idea that caution needs to be to kept in mind when considering students’ own conceptual framework while creating curricula around hierarchical and organisational concepts (Brooks, 2017: 109). We presumed that the speed of the observed change was more relevant for the learners than the dynamic of change. Four out of six students used the words rapid or slow to describe the morphology of change. The words irregular or discontinuous were only used to state that the change was unexpected.

140

P. Serwene

Referring to the component of materiality, it can be argued that the students’ descriptions emphasise that the learners were neither able to imagine Idomeni, nor to develop a sense of place (Brooks & Morgan, 2006: 27). The learners had difficulties working with this component even though they had several visual impulses. They only used the contradictory properties mentioned by the teachers. Concerning the re-design and moving towards the second intervention and the Berlin RAW area case study, we decided that the main focus should be upon fostering a more differentiated evaluation of the components in the students’ ‘written analyses. To find an answer on how to achieve this, we decided that the video transcripts needed to be analysed and interpreted to retrace the learning processes of the students to understand how the above-mentioned results are caused.

9.7  Re-Design of the Learning Environment The context of the 2nd intervention was the RAW in Berlin with the leading question “RAW area - from a safe place to a dangerous zone”. The re-design was based on the following conclusions of the 1st intervention: • The components which were predominately taught in a direct way to the learners, e.g. ‘materiality’ and ‘morphology’, were only described by the words the teacher used in class. Any individual evaluation of the components was missing. • The used visual impulses (pictures of Idomeni and a video of the refugee camp) were insufficient to teach a sense of place. • To structure the information cards in a concept map to show the transformation process of Idomeni was not enough to enable the students to describe complex cause-effect-relations. • The agents of the transformation process were not captured by the learners. The undertaken changes in the design of the learning environment are written in italic in Table 9.5. There were two changes in the implementation principles and several in the practical teaching ascertainment. First, the components were also used as analytical tools. The students were asked to find categories for the information cards and to include the components morphology, time sequence, agents and function in their design of the concept map. Second, the components are only conveyed in an indirect way to the students to avoid that the students only use the predetermined feature of each component given by the teacher in their written analysis. A fieldtrip to the RAW area as well as more different pictures of the RAW area were used to achieve a sense of place in the learning environment.

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

141

Table 9.5  Design principles of the 2nd intervention Design Principles Process of contextualisation and decontextualisation (concept-components-context)

Implementation principles Introducing the concept change in context The components are used as evaluative tool

The components were used as analytic tool during the design of the concept map

Components conveyed only in an indirect way

Active learning

Designing a concept map

Visualisation

Pictures/ video

Practical teaching ascertainment Starting point is the context (RAW area Berlin) The final text involves the evaluation of each component to describe the changes at the RAW area The students had to develop categories for the information cards The students were asked to include morphology, time sequence, agents and function in their design of the concept map Time: Using several pictures of the RAW area during the day and at night at different dates Process: Designing a concept map showing cause-effect-­ relations of the change The students organise 16 information cards to show the process of change The students had to develop categories for the information cards The students were asked to include morphology, time sequence, agents and function in their design of the concept map Using several pictures of the RAW area during the day and at night at different dates Doing a field trip to the RAW area

9.8  Analysis of the Findings – 2nd Intervention 9.8.1  Time Sequence of Change Most students (11/14) describe a time sequence of the change. Interestingly, half of these students (5/11) used day and night as a temporal comparison. Paul: “The night in the RAW-area is very dangerous, because many night crawlers have been attacked or robbed at night. However, during the day, the RAW- area is a nice location with trees, chairs and tables.”

142

P. Serwene

9.8.2  Morphology of Change None of the students described the morphology of change explicitly. Most students (12/14) remain at the level of describing violent events and countermeasures against criminality. Therefore, the dynamic of change is only addressed indirectly. Ben: “On the other Hand is the RAW area is a very dangerous place because of many Pickpockets and drug dealers. The Berlin Police tries to do something against the high crime rate, for instance they put signs at the RAW area to warn from Pickpockets and they posted as well on facebook how to behavior at the RAW area.”

9.8.3  Transformation Process An increase in describing complex cause-and-effect relations can be seen in the 2nd intervention by two thirds of the students (10/14). The students identified events that had a negative influence on the RAW area as well as countermeasures taken to stop the negative trend. Different events and measures were interpreted as moments of change that triggered the transformation process. Hanna: “Since the RAW area changed from a cultural to a party place many kriminals, pic pcets and drugdealers came and violent happenings got often. People, mostly tourists, were robbet, attact and hurt badly.But not only the RAW-area changed, since many clubs, bars and restaurants have private security the drug dealers use the nearby streets in the neighbourhood to sell drugs. Many neighbours feel bad with this situation and are annoyed and afraid when 60 drug dealers stand in front of their house.”

9.8.4  Agents of the Transformation Process The most remarkable observation from the students’ analysis of the changes in Berlin’s RAW area was the differentiation between the people involved. All students named tourists, visitors, thieves, police and neighbours as those involved in the transformation process. Additionally, half of the students (8/14) distinguished between agents who influenced the transformation process positively or negatively. Agents with positive influences were mainly the police, neighbours, the Berlin government and the owner of the RAW. People described as having a negative influence were primarily hug scammers, thieves and, surprisingly, tourists. Examples are given: Hanna: “Many kriminals, thieves and drug dealers came and violent happenings got often.” Jonas: “The police posted insecure spots on facebook to warn night crawlers.”

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

143

9.8.5  Distance Half of the students (7/14) choose beside the time sequence of change distance as another reference point. They explained how the change at the RAW area has an influence on the nearby streets. Emma: “Due to the fact that many tourists visit clubs and bars in that area, most of these locations have theire own secruity. That is why the crime happens on the nearby streets.“

Moreover, three students analyse how a zero-tolerance-course concerning drug trafficking in another area in Kreuzberg has a negative impact on the drug trafficking at the RAW area. Sophia: Since the city of Berlin made a no go area in the Görlizerpark for Mariuana. So the drug dealers had to search for another place to do their business. I think that this is the reason why they went to the RAW-Area.

9.9  I nterpretation of the 2nd Intervention – Identifying the Leading Design Principles The lesson topic ‘The RAW area – from a safe place to a dangerous zone’ led to the students trying to identify when the RAW area is safe or unsafe. The analysis of the students’ writings shows that the time component in the process of transformation is interpreted more individually as the teacher did not consider a day and night comparison concerning the aspect of security and danger. The fact to use the components not only as an evaluative tool but also as an analytical tool while creating the concept map seems helpful for the student’s understanding of the component time. Even though the students did a fieldtrip to the RAW and had more visual impressions of the place in terms of pictures, the analysis shows that the components materiality and function have not been analysed in the students’ texts. These components of the concept change were less evident in this case study compared to the changing place Idomeni. This emphasises that not every component of the concept change is in the same way significant in each case study. Looking at the 2nd intervention compared to the first one, it can be stated that the concept of change is acquired more nuanced by the learners. This can be seen in the students’ analysis of the components time, transformation process and agents. These components are described more differentiated and complex as shown in Table 9.6.

144

P. Serwene

Table 9.6  Evaluation of selected components of the concept change in the 1st and 2nd intervention Evaluation of some components of the concept change compared Components of the concept Time

Transformation process

Agents

1st intervention

2nd intervention

The students… Use given features of the component time (long or short). Typical example: “I think the change in Idomeni took place in a short time because the border got closed from one day to the other.” Identify mainly one moment of change and a one-­ dimensional cause-effect-relation. Typical example: “The borders have been closed that migrants can’t cross the Greek-Macedonian border and the borders in Slowenia to Serbia closed too. The refugees stucked in Idomeni.”

Interpret the period of time more individually. Considering a change at the RAW between day and night. Typical example: “In my opinion the RAW area is safe and insecure at the same time. At night is more insecure than at the day. So the day is also a littlebit insecure but more safe than the night.” Identify several cause-effect relations, moments of change and countermeasures to stop the negative trends. Typical example: “Recently in the RAW-area there have been many violent happenings.” (moment of change) “Due to the fact that many tourists visit clubs and bars in that area, most of these locations have theire own secruity. That is why the crime happens on the streets”. (cause-effect-relation) “In order to warn the people the police painted symbols on the floor that there are pickpockets”. (countermeasures) Identify several agents and often Only refer to the refugees, Greece and Macedonia. The differentiate if the agents have a positive European Union, inhabitants or negative influence on the changes. Typical example: of the village or the police “Many kriminals, pic pocets and drug are not mentioned. dealers came and violent happenings got Typical example: often. “The refugees stucked in The police posted insecure spots on Idomeni.” “Macedonia fully sealed its Facebook for especially night crawler and the owner of the RAW area invested border.” in better lightning.”

The 2nd Intervention revealed that the following design principles have a positive effect on the students’ powerful knowledge of changing places: • to use the components of geographical concepts as analytical and evaluative tools • to include the analysis and evaluation of the components of a geographical concept into the design of a product (a concept map) • to categorise the information cards by means of the components ‘transformation process’ (causes and effects) and ‘agents’

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

145

9.10  Conclusion The findings of this study point towards the idea that the recontextualisation of knowledge does not end where “discourses from the field of production are selected, appropriated and transformed to become ‘educational’ knowledge” (Firth, 2017: 278). Firth (2017: 283) suggests further research on “the process of classroom practice as, in part, a product of the recontextualisation and reproduction of disciplinary knowledge”. Especially, the students’ analyses of the component morphology in the 1st intervention support Firth’s statement. The interpretations of the morphology of change differ strongly between teacher and learner. Whereas, in the 2nd intervention the interpretation of the time sequence of change and the involved agents exceeded the teacher’s expectations. Consequently, recontextualisation should be interpreted as a continuous spiral, including the process of reproducing disciplinary knowledge by the learners as another level of recontextualisation (see Fig. 9.3). • To conclude, the results of the study show that tdesign principles need to be considered to contribute to the development of powerful disciplinary knowledge concerning the geographical concept of change: In particular:The components time, process and agent are easier for students to analyse and to evaluate in the process of recontextualisation. • The components materiality, morphology and function are more difficult for the learners to apply to changing places. • The components of a concept are better applicable for the learners if they are conveyed indirectly. Otherwise the students use only preconceived descriptions of the components of a concept (e.g. component morphology in the first intervention)..

Fig. 9.3  Recontextualisation continued

146

P. Serwene

• The process of contextualisation and decontextualisation need to be designed as action-oriented and individual as possible in the learning environment. (e.g.applying the components to the design of the concept map) Finally, recontextualisation involves a complex interplay between teacher and student, as open spaces where knowledge is navigated and negotiated. The findings of this study support Firth’s idea that it may be useful to view the recontextualisation and acquisition of knowledge as being concerned with the way in which different epistemic communities (teachers and students) relate to one another (Firth, 2011: 310). The results of the study show that conceptual learning needs the interplay between concept and context – therefore the process of recontextualisation. The components of a concept need to be applied as an analytical tool to look at the geographical context and as an evaluative tool to assess the on-going changes and to compare different changes to develop an understanding of the geographical concept change.

References Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of Progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813 Behrakis, Y. (2015). Police, migrants clash on Macedonia border; soldiers build fence. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-­europe-­migrants-­macedonia/police-­ migrants-­clash-­on-­macedonia-­border-­soldiers-­build-­fence-­idUSKBN0TH04M20151128 Bortels, T. (2015). Violence and mugging at Berlin’s nightlife hotspot RAW. nuBerlin. Retrieved from https://www.nuberlin.com/2015/08/violence-­and-­mugging-­at-­berlins-­nightlife-­hotspot-­raw/ Brooks, C. (2013). How do we understand conceptual development in school geography? In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (pp. 75–88). Routledge. Brooks, C. (2017). Understanding conceptual development in school geography. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (pp. 103–114). Routledge. Brooks, C., & Morgan, A. (2006). Sense of place. Theory into practice: Cases and places. Geographical Association. Chischinger, A. (2015). Flüchtlingsbürokratie. In Europa angekommen - und dann? SpiegelOnline. Retrieved from http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/fluechtlinge-­so-­funktioniert-­die-­dublin-­ verordnung-­a-­1029803.html Demuth, R., Ralls, B., & Parchmann, I. (2005). Basiskonzepte  – eine Herausforderung an den Chemieunterricht. Chem, 12(2), 55–60. Dodgshon, R. (1998). Society in time and space. A geographical perspective of change. Cambridge University Press. Euler, D. (2014). Design-Research – a paradigm under development. In D. Euler & P. F. E. Sloane. Design-based research (pp.  15–44). Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik, (27), Franz Steiner Verlag. Euler, D., & Reinmann, G. (2017). Design principles as bridge between scientific knowledge production and practice design. Educational Design Research, 1(1), 1–15. https://doi. org/10.15460/eder.1.1.1024

9  Recontextualisation Continued: Designing and Evaluating Conceptual Learning…

147

Firth, R. (2011). Making geography visible as an object of study in the secondary school curriculum. The Curriuculum Journal, 22, 289–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2011.601209 Firth, R. (2017). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (pp. 275–286). Routledge. Fögele, J. (2016). Entwicklung basiskonzeptionellen Verständnisses in geographischen Lehrerfortbildungen: Rekonstruktive Typenbildung/Relationale Prozessanalyse/Responsive Evaluation (pp. 12–99). HGD – Hochschulverband für Geographiedidaktik. Fögele, J., & Mehren, R. (2015). Implementing geographical key concepts: Design of a Symbiotic Teacher Training Course Based on empirical and theoretical evidence. RIGEO, 5(1), 56–76. Karagiannopoulos, L., & Fronista, P. (2016). Greece steps up efforts to move migrants to sheltered camps. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-­europe-­migrants-­greece/ greece-­steps-­up-­efforts-­to-­move-­migrants-­to-­sheltered-­camps-­idUSKCN0WE0UN Kuckartz, U. (2016). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung (pp. 97–117). Beltz Juventa. Nibbrig, H. (2017). Warschauer Brücke – So gefährlich ist die Partymeile. Berliner Morgenpost. Retrieved from https://www.morgenpost.de/berlin/article212268757/Warschauer-­Bruecke-­ eine-­Party-­Meile-­mit-­Nervenkitzel.html Lambert, D. (2013). Geographical concepts. In M.  Rolfes & A.  Uhlenwinkel (Eds.), Metzler Handbuch 2.0 Geographieunterricht: Ein Leitfaden für Praxis und Ausbildung (pp. 174–181). Westermann. Plomp, T. (2007). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieven (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (pp. 9–37). SLO. R.A.W. Team. (2019). About R.A.W. R.A.W. Berlin. Retrieved from https://raw-­gelaende.de/en/ about-­r-­a-­w/#colophon Rost, D. (2014). Wandel (v)erkennen. Shifting baselines und die Wahrnehmung umweltrelevanter Veränderungen aus wissenssoziologischer Sicht. Springer. Schmalz, A. (2017). Görlitzer Park. Null-Toleranz-Strategie der Polizei vor dem aus. Berliner Zeitung. Retrieved from https://www.berliner-­zeitung.de/berlin/polizei/ goerlitzer-­park-­null-­toleranz-­strategie-­der-­polizei-­vor-­dem-­aus-­26158122 Serwene, P. (2017). Orte auf Zeit – illegal refugee camps in Europe: Wandlungsprozesse anhand des griechischen Orts Idomeni im Rahmen eines zweisprachigen Unterrichtskonzepts verstehen. In A. Budke & M. Kuckuck (Eds.), Migration und Geographische Bildung (pp. 267–282). Franz Steiner Verlag. Taylor, L. (2008). Key concepts and medium term planning. Teaching Geography, 33(2), 50–54. The Local. (2016). A night on Berlin’s most notorious clubbing mile. The Local. Retrieved from https://www.thelocal.de/20160922/is-­there-­more-­to-­berlins-­most-­infamous-­clubbing-­district-­ than-­we-­think-­raw Türk, V. (2016). Envisioning a common European asylum system. Forced migration. Retrieved from http://www.fmreview.org/sites/fmr/files/FMRdownloads/en/destination-­ europe/tuerk.pdf

Chapter 10

Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living in the Slums of Nairobi, Kenya Andreas Eberth

10.1  I ntroduction: What are Students’ Perceptions When/If Hearing the Term ‘Africa’? For several years there have been different studies which show that the way we think and teach about ‘Africa’ in the so-called Western countries is unilateral and biased by negative associations such as poverty, hunger, disease and conflict. Even the image of ‘Africa’ shown in public media is dominated by the dichotomies of negative aspects and positive romantic cheesy ideas (Mbembe, 2017, 2019). For geography teachers it is not easy to solve this problem as there are few teaching materials that attempt to present different perspectives. Against this background, the main research question that frames the study outlined in this chapter is: How can perspectives be broadened and a differentiated image of ‘Africa’ (both in the sense of pictures as well as in a sense of mental representations) be conveyed by orienting geography lessons towards the key concepts space and place? This chapter aims to show the benefit of recontextualising geographical concepts and content. On the one hand, it shows potentials and limits of the concepts of space and place for geography lessons, but on the other hand it illustrates how to recontextualise African-related aspects in geography lessons. In general, this means that we need to be aware of the “danger of a single story” (Adichie, 2009). To realise this, we need to first of all clarify that it is not appropriate to talk about ‘Africa’ as a supposedly homogenous whole (Mercer et al., 2003, 422). In geography lessons we should rather focus on manageable case studies. In such a way, this A. Eberth (*) Institute for Science Education, Department for Geography Education, Leibniz University Hannover, Hanover, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_10

149

150

A. Eberth

chapter will focus specifically on the Everyday Geographies of Young People living in the Slums of Nairobi, Kenya as a topic for geography lessons.

10.2  Recontextualising Concepts Geographical concepts can be a helpful orientation and theoretical framework for planning lessons (Lambert & Morgan, 2010), yet they are quite abstract. Some common concepts are space and place (Massey, 2005; Cresswell, 2014). While space is relatively concrete – inter alia due to the fact that it is mappable – place seems to be difficult to understand. That is a problematic, because place is significant in a number of ways. The broader perspective becomes clearer through the definition used by Yi-Fu Tuan, who clarifies that an “undifferentiated space becomes place as we get to know it better and endow it with value” (Tuan, 1977, 6). But it is precisely this endowment with value that is not an easy task. This characteristic makes place more intangible. Therefore, it might be helpful to investigate the concepts of emotional and everyday geographies. If place is endowed with value, it is always an emotional process. Emotions can be defined as “ways of knowing, being and doing” (Pile, 2010, 6). The way we feel is important for shaping our actions: “Almost self-evidently, how we feel (about ourselves, others, issues, spaces and situations) is important in shaping our interactions with other human beings” (Horton & Kraftl, 2014, 230). The significance of place can thus be described as both an emotional as well as a rational concept (Nyairo, 2006, 73). The importance of emotional geographies is also considered by Davidson et al. (2005). Most of the time, places that are important personally for individuals or groups are not the most prestigious ones like castles, cathedrals or others – for many people meaningful places can be found in the “all-­ around-­us-ness” (Horton & Kraftl, 2014, 183). In this sense, “a geography of the everyday might simply be defined as concerned with places in which everyday activities occur” (Holloway & Hubbard, 2001, 36). In appreciating everyday geographies, we should understand, that “everyday life is fundamental to all human geographies and geographical issues” (Horton & Kraftl, 2014, 198), and the “real centre of social practice” (Bertuzzo, 2009, 26), especially for young people (Tani & Surma-aho, 2012). Highmore (2002) pursues this concept of everyday life. In this reading, it seems crucial to rush to ‘culture’ as the explanatory factor for the difference between space and place (Tuan, 1977, 5). Culture can be defined as “a particular way of life, such as a set of skilled activities, values, and meanings surrounding a particular type of practice. […], and broadly speaking is a shared set of meanings that is lived through the material and symbolice practices of everyday life. […] The ‘shared set of meanings’ can include values, beliefs, ideas, practices and ideas about family, childhood, race, gender, sexuality and other important identities or strong associations” (Knox & Marston, 2016, 180). With this definition,

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

151

Paul Knox and Sallie S. Marston (ibid.) show that culture is appropriate for describing and explaining everyday behaviour, routines and activities. The five key dimensions of cultural geography (Anderson et al., 2003, 2) help furthermore to make the concept of culture manageable: • • • • •

culture as doing culture as power culture as meaning culture as way of life culture as distribution of things

Combining everyday geographies and emotional geographies as selected key concepts of cultural geography with the key dimensions of cultural geography might help us better understand the additional value of the concept that is place. This is also evident in Fran Martin’s work, who puts emotions and place in relation to everyday geographies (2006, 6). Figure 10.1 illustrates of how these concepts work together and can be recontextualised.

Fig. 10.1  Recontextualising geographical concepts for explaining the value of place (own representation with reference to Anderson et al., 2003, 2; Horton & Kraftl, 2014)

152

A. Eberth

10.3  Recontextualising Content In most cases, ‘Africa’ is spoken of only in extremes: as a place of longing or as a place of hunger, disease and wars. So, ‘Africa’ is seen as a “place of beautiful landscapes, beautiful animals, and incomprehensible people, fighting senseless wars, and waiting to be saved, by a kind white foreigner” (Adichie, 2009). The reasons for the development of these stereotypes lie in the way that ‘Africa’ is represented in media (Martin & Griffiths, 2012, 908) – and even in geography textbooks (Myers, 2001). Photographs have a particularly strong influence in the construction of stereotypes. Often used are “alarming photographs of starving children, starving mothers, desperate refugees, or charred human remains” (Myers, 2001, 527). Thus, “it has been hard to avoid the focus on Africa as a poverty-stricken continent” (Martin & Griffiths, 2012, 908). Geography lessons must take on the challenge of avoiding this type of student socialization. Challenging the ‘socialization’ of students into a range of racialized binaries must therefore be a crucial starting point in developing an anti-racist understanding of development” (Power, 2006, 27). We need to stop talking about ‘Africa’ in its entirety. “For those teaching courses on Africa it is a continual struggle to get students to think of Africa as a mosaic of nation-states as opposed to the usual analysis of ‘countries like Africa’” (Mercer et al., 2003, 422). But it is not only necessary to address the diversity of Africa’s countries. It is more important to show the diversity of the people. In many cases this is not yet realized, as Marcus Power comments when surveying the use of the term ‘the poor’: “‘the poor’ become a homogenous and undifferentiated mass characterized by an almost barbaric, toxic backwardness that is deeply reminiscent of racialized colonial representations of the tribalism and savagery of the ‘other’” (Power, 2006, 25). This means, geography education needs to focus more on the subject level. This means that situational knowledge should be taken into account. Therefore, a focus on the concept of everyday geographies is helpful. Yi-Fu Tuan points out, that place needs to be clarified and understood from the perspective of the people who have given it its meaning (Tuan, 2016, 133). However, particularly regarding ‘Africa’, most of the time we choose the perspective of space instead of shifting to place. With regard to research in the cities of the so-called Global South, AbdouMaliq Simone and Edgar Pieterse demand a focus on the “affective dynamics of everyday urbanism” (2017, xvii). These reflections are the starting point of the research outlined in this chapter. To account for this, the chosen focus for the study was the Everyday Geographies of Young People Living in the Slums of Nairobi, Kenya and serves as an example of how teachers need to recontextualise in order to adequately teach this topic in geography classes.To achieve this aim, I designed a study divided in two parts: 1. Using photo-elicitation as a method to visualise everyday cultures of young people living in Korogocho, one of Nairobi’s slums 2. An intervention study in geography lessons at German schools about teaching space and place, pupils’ perceptions about life in the slums of Nairobi and the way how to change these perceptions

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

153

10.4  E  veryday Geographies of Young People, Living in the Slums of Nairobi Sixty to seventy percent of Nairobi’s inhabitants live on 5% of the cities’ area in so-called slums1 (UN-Habitat, 2012, 24). Korogocho, as one of Nairobi’s slums, is the area of investigation of this study. This settlement is located in the north-east of the Central Business District. The Kiswahili name translated means “crowded, shoulder to shoulder” (UN-Habitat, 2012, 15), which might be a metaphor for the settlement density. The official 2009 census counted 41,946 inhabitants in Korogocho (KNBS, 2010, 35), whereas an estimated 150,000 people live on an expanse of 50 hectares (UN-Habitat, 2012, 26). If we understand places as “fields of care” (Tuan, 2016, 157) and realize that “they can be known in essence only from within” (ibid.), we need to find a research design that makes it possible to show, perhaps to visualise, the insiders’ perception of the place they live in. That is the reason why it was decided to work with young people between the age of 15 and 24, which is UNESCO’s definition of “youth” (UNESCO n.d., n.p.). For participation in the study, it was a requirement that all participants were born and raised in Korogocho – and still live there. Consequently, I did not recruit to the study people of the generations born in rural areas. Rather, the work was undertaken with people of a younger generation who had never lived in the villages upcountry. In total, the study was undertaken with 35 participants organised in 15 youth groups.

10.4.1  Methodology Guided by the research question How do young people living in Korogocho perceive their everyday living space as place? data was collected using the method of photo-­ elicitation (Rose, 2016, 315). This method combines taking photographs with a reflexive interview. A high level of autonomy can be given to the participants, due to the fact that they decide by themselves what they want to photograph. Even the interview is not based on set guidelines. As part of quasi-narrative interviews, the photographs are the frame and give the basis of what to talk about. The advantage of this method is that it is a kind of “researching with, not on” (Mizen & Ofosu-­ Kusi, 2006): the participants are the actual experts, they can shape the survey phase, they are “agents of their own inquiry” (Mizen & Ofosu-Kusi, 2010, 254). Through this approach a Eurocentric view was avoided (Ofosu-Kusi, 2017, 111; Luttrell & Chalfen, 2010, 198). Reflecting on positionality, this means that a key characteristic of this method is that the researcher’s influence is relatively small. In relation to cooperation with so-called marginalised people, this seems to make sense, since the method is:  The discourse on the term ‘slum’ is summed up in Nuissl and Heinrichs (2013).

1

154

A. Eberth

“designed to give a voice to people marginalized by narrow definitions of the city that exclude the ways that people actually live in the cities. This approach sees people not as victims of urbanization but examines how they construct their own lives” (McLees, 2013, 284).

It is this approach that results in empowering the participants, which is recognised as an important facet of photo-elicitation (Rose, 2016, 315). Even so, given that a researcher from the so-called ‘Global North’ is conducting research in a country of the so-called ‘Global South’, a sensitive reflection on the choice of method is necessary (McLees, 2013; Rigg, 2007). The importance of this method “in a postcolonial approach in urban geography is that it enables the participants to frame and articulate their experiences, rather than that being left to a colonial gaze of the researcher” (McLees, 2013, 293). In summary, the following features are advantages of the chosen method (by Rose, 2016, 315 f.): • Discussing a photograph can prompt talk about different things, things that researchers have not thought about • Places may be shown that are inaccessible to the researcher (e.g. for privacy reasons, non-membership of an ingroup) • Photographs tend to give deeper and more emotional insights by the interview compared to other interview methods such as guide supported ones • Interviews with participant-generated visual materials are particularly helpful in exploring everyday things taken for granted in the research participants’ lives • Getting research participants to say why they took a photo and what it means gives them a clear and central role in the research process which can be understood as empowerment

10.4.2  Data Collection and Timeline The data collection took place over a period of four weeks. I worked with different youth groups each day. The data collection phase was divided into three parts: first I met the participants of one youth group to allow us to get to know each other and to exchange basic information about the project. This was followed by the second part, in which the participants independently selected photo motifs during a timeframe of 60 minutes. For this purpose, the following instructions were given: Take up to three photos of things, places or people which or who are important in your everyday life. The third part was characterised by a reflexive, quasi-narrative interview based on the participants’ photographs. Table  10.1 gives an impression of the sample.

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

155

Table 10.1  Sample: Participants of different youth groups in Korogocho Name of the youth group Nyoda Initiatives Nyayo Youth Development Group Tujiunue Youth Group KochFM Korogocho Youth Group Best Friends Self Help Group Mdondo Youth Group Nayao Visionary Youth Group Mwanga – Olympic Flame Arts and Music Group Miss Koch Pamoja Empowerment and Resource Centre Pamoja’s Women Group Environment Youth Group Githurai Sports Group Youth-to-Youth-Club Pamoja TOTAL

Female participants 1 1 2 2 1

Male participants 3 2 2 3 3 1 2

2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 14

21

Fig. 10.2  Photographs taken by the participants organised in a youth group called KochFM

10.4.3  Findings and Analysis Detailed data analysis is outlined in Eberth (2019). In this chapter, I only give one example as an insight into the findings. Five of the participants, who were part of the KochFM group, took two pictures that show the organisation’s radio studio (see Fig. 10.2).

156

A. Eberth

The participants started by describing what KochFM as a radio station is working with regards to depicting Korogocho. The participants pointed out that KochFM was founded to show the “good sides” of Korogocho. Developing a new organisation had been felt necessary due to the fact that the mainstream media only reported about Korogocho when negative things like crime happened. “But if you look at Korogocho again, there are so many good things that are happening. There are good musicians who are making it good in Korogocho. Very young people are doing something positive for their community. There are a lot of good things that are happening in Korogocho. So, KochFM was founded to portrait the good side of Korogocho. Believe, we are not that bad.” (Db5, 81.4ff.)

It appears from this statement that the mainstream media reported a very one-­ sided representation that conceals the good aspects of Korogocho. The participants went on to point out that Korogocho has undergone a change over the last few years since youth groups started to improve socio-economic conditions. “The things in Korogocho are really, really improving. If you compare it to the last years, especially in terms of security it is improving. (…) As inhabitants of Korogocho we are working on it. But I think it is much, much better than it was two, three years ago. (-) Young people are also coming up and start to do very constructive things. I normally tell people, the challenge that we face is that for the people who are growing up there were no role models in Korogocho. The only people we saw in Korogocho (-) were people who were very criminal. (…) But over the last years, there were more and more people coming up who have made it in life.” (Db5, 81.10ff.)

KochFM members stated that these kinds of development are not just individual cases or single stories. They clarified that the youth groups’ engagement had led to a change in the whole community. “The youth who are already empowered can use energy to empower other people who have gone astray. (…) Organisations like youth groups can at least involve young people who are still in (-) still in the bad and empower them and show them to bring more energy as moving power to transform Korogocho.” (Db5, 85.6ff.)

This kind of change led to a different perception of Korogocho as place through empowerment of the young people. So, those empowered young people identify with Korogocho as their home – yes, as a home that is no longer a slum. (Db5, 85.13f.)

The data were analysed by qualitative content analysis (Kuckartz, 2014). Five key dimensions of cultural geography were selected as A-priori-codes. Additionally, I completed a category system with three N-vivo-codes generated directly from the material: feeling of responsibility, development/change, challenges. Table  10.2 shows the number of times the catorgeries identified were mentioned. Summarising the thematic analysis, there are three main findings: the importance of youth groups as community-based organisations, the influence of youth groups in the community, and a deeply felt sense of place among the young people.

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living… Table 10.2  Using MaxQDA as software, this frequency of categories can be mentioned

Culture as doing Feeling of responsibility Culture as power Challenges Culture as meaning Development/change Culture as way of life Culture as distribution of things

157

57 times 53 times 50 times 42 times 24 times 18 times 14 times 8 times

10.4.3.1  T  he Importance of Youth Groups as Community-Based Organisations in This Location Only two out of ten young people living in the slums of Nairobi were not involved in youth groups or income-generating activities (Sana, 2016, 151). From the perspective of development policy, it appears that the structure of community-based organisations (CBOs) cooperating with (international) non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has prevailed. The outcomes of this research reveal that these groups contribute to a personal empowerment of its members and enable them to generate income. Insofar, these groups facilitate socio-economic development. The “[…] empowerment paradigm argues that the biggest asset a poor community has is its stock of social capital, which allows it to carry out collective actions on the basis of solidarity. Social capital is best enhanced through collective actions that address the physical well-being of the participating individuals (and households)” (Pieterse, 2014, 206 f.). 10.4.3.2  The Influence of the Youth Groups in the Wider Community “A number of youth-led initiatives have been instrumental in generating political will and accountability, uplifting the soco-economic well-being, leadership and governance capacity in low income communities. […] The initiatives […] attract both the young and older community members by providing them with opportunities for involvement, participation and airing their views” (Njoroge, 2016, 142 f.). This phenomenon which George Njoroge identifies for Nairobi’s slums can even be seen in the data collected in this study. There is a strongly felt connection between the inhabitants of the Korogocho area and between different generations. The young participants refer to three characteristic reasons for being a member of a youth group or a community-based organisation: feeling responsible for change in Korogocho, doing something good for the community, and creating an opportunity to earn an income.

158

A. Eberth

10.4.3.3  A Deeply Felt Sense of Place Among the Young People “The places to which we are most attached are literally fields of care” (Relph, 1976, 38). The community action of most of the young people, as shown above, illustrates that there is a deeply felt sense of place, which is one of the reasons for young people to take care of this place. This appears to illustrate the concept of sense of place that is based on three main characteristics (Hernandez et al., 2014): • place identity, which means a cognitive connection to this place (e.g. young people know that they were born and raised in Korogocho and that they are aware of development in space and time) • place attachment, which means an emotional and affective connection to this place (e.g. young people define Korogocho as their home) • place dependence, which refers to a functional connection to this place (e.g. due to the low prices of the different commodities sold on local markets, life becomes somehow easy, because you can buy for example food at low prices)

10.5  Discussion The findings from this research indicate that the younger generation living in Nairobi’s slums can be described as active and committed members of civil society. That means that they reclaim new forms of governance and the chance to participate in decision making processes (see aswell Rigg, 2007, 156; Eberth, 2016). Some research shows that they have a significant influence on urban development and transformation: “[…] our greatest resource and opportunity to solve the African urban crisis lies with the people […] – the agents of slum urbanism. […] instead of regarding the urban poor and excluded urbanities as the problem, we should recognize the energies and ingenuity that they marshall to retain their place in the city, despite the odds against them” (Pieterse, 2014, 205). These dynamics are hardly recognised by the societies in the countries of the so-­ called ‘Western World’ or ‘Global North’. For us, living in a slum still means poverty and misery. It is somehow strange that we condemn people’s homes as dirty and marginalised. “[…] informal settlements are the ‘homes of people’, at the beginning and the end of the day, and everyday realities are often normalized for residents, regardless of the poverty, hardship, or grief that that form of ‘normal’ might be” (Myers, 2011, 71). Generally, the creative coping strategies of the locals – as locally adapted and self-developed livelihood measures  – are not or less recognised by people in the so-called ‘Western World’.

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

159

10.6  I mplications for Geography Education – An Intervention Study Geography education needs to consider these points. Using the geographical concepts of space and place helps to integrate different perspectives on life in Nairobi’s slums into geography lessons. A possible format would be a series of lessons where the first lesson is based on the concept of space, the second lesson on the concept of place. Below is an outline of what these lessons might look like and which were tried with students in German secondary schools as part of this study.

10.6.1  Lesson 1: Nairobi as Space As a preparatory work, the students research the following task: Find a photo that matches your idea of life in Nairobi’s slums. In school, students use the placemat activity2 to critically analyse their photographs. Simultaneously, everyone began to answer the following questions regarding their photograph: • Why did you choose this photo? • Who could have taken the photo? • How would the effect of the photo change if the photographer would have chosen a slightly different frame? • What could have been the photographer’s intention to choose exactly this motif? Each student answered these questions individually and wrote down the answers in his or her field of the placemat. Subsequently, a group of students, who form a group around a placemat, presented their results to each other. When they were ready they discussed what might be a good definition of the term ‘slum’ and wrote down in the middle of the placemat. Together in a plenery, the definitions of the different groups are compared, and the main characteristics of a slum recorded. In a second step, the students analysed a satellite image showing Nairobi’s slum Kibera and a map of Nairobi, where the population density was mapped. They also used this map to locate the Korogocho area. Lastly, the students filled out a scientific questionnaire similar to that shown in Fig. 10.5.

2   Find information about this method online: http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/sssm/html/ placematactivity_sm.html

160

A. Eberth

10.6.2  Lesson 2: Korogocho as Place The second lesson focused on everyday geographies of young people living in Korogocho. Whereas the first lesson illustrated an outside view of Nairobi, this lesson aimed to show an insider’s view of everyday cultures in a slum. Worksheets such as the example given in Fig. 10.3 were prepared in order to give an insight in to the data collected in part one of the study in Korogocho. The students analysed the photographs and selected comments made by the photographers, using the guidance at the top of the sheet. As a homework assignment the students were then asked to take photographs themselves to show important aspects of their own everyday life. In this way, they became more aware of their own sense of place and compare their pictures with those from Korogocho.

10.6.3  M  easurement of Learning Success Through an Intervention Study The two lessons described are part of an intervention study as outlined in Fig. 10.4. This intervention was conducted with eight classes of grade 9 students at three secondary schools (so-called Gymnasium in Germany) in Hanover, a city with about half a million inhabitants in northern Germany. 179 students took part (n = 179). As Fig.  10.4 shows, there were two measurement periods in which a standardised paper-pencil-questionnaire was used. This consisted of nine questions, mainly closed but also including open questions. An example of a question that the students were asked is about their perception of life in a slum. Students were asked to specify appropriate terms in a polarity profile like that set out in Fig. 10.5 from their point of view. The first measurement took place at the end of the first lesson, and the second measurement at the end of the second lesson. The results for each question is represented in the semantic differential shown in Fig. 10.6. The results of the questionnaire are illustrated in the semantic differential shown in Fig. 10.6. While negative associations predominated at the first measuring point, the perception at the second measuring point was significantly more differentiated. The evaluation of the other questions completed by the students in the study supported this trend. Overall the findings from this part of the study can be summarized as follows: • ‘Africa’ should not be taught as a homogenous concept but rather place-based examples and clear case studies must become subjects of the lessons. • Those case studies should not only be viewed from the outside – e.g. using statistical data. Rather, diversity of people and places needs to be made transparent. • This means that it is necessary to recontextualise Africa-related content that constitutes part of geography lessons.

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

Fig. 10.3  Example of one of the worksheets used in the lesson

161

162

Fig. 10.4  The intervention study

Fig. 10.5  Example of questionnaire used with students

A. Eberth

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

163

Fig. 10.6  Example of a semantic differential produced from the questionnaire data

• Using the geographical concepts place, emotional geographies and everyday geographies enables the integration of different perspectives in geography lessons.

10.7  Concluding Remarks The findings from the two-part study outlined in this chapter indicate that the geographical concept of place has the potential to facilitate the integration of individual and/or subjective perspectives within geography lessons. This approach which includes critical-reflexive image analysis can contribute towards the dismantling of prejudices and stereotypes and can enrich geography teaching with new, previously unknown perspectives being elicited. In order to make this possible, corresponding perspectives must be collected by the teacher and made transparent through background research in advance of the lessons. This makes it possible to show the insider’s perspectives to places – “in beginning with the personal and the everyday, in using the experience of the non-Western world to illuminate und inform mainstream debates in geography” (Rigg, 2007). This case study is just one example illustrating the potential of this process of recontextualisation geography in the classroom and its subsequent benefits.

164

A. Eberth

References Adichie, C.  N. (2009). The danger of a single story. https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story. Accessed 10 Dec 2019. Anderson, K., Domosh, M., Pile, S., & Thrift, N. (2003). A rough guide. In K.  Anderson, M. Domosh, S. Pile, & N. Thrift (Eds.), Handbook of cultural geography (pp. 1–35). Sage. Bertuzzo, E. T. (2009). Fragmented Dhaka. Analysing everyday life with Henri Lefebvre’s Theory of Production of Space. Steiner. Cresswell, T. (2014). Place: An introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. Davidson, J., Bondi, L., & Smith, M. (Eds.). (2005). Emotional geographies. Routledge. Eberth, A. (2016). Partizipation junger Zivilgesellschaften in den Slums von Nairobi – ein Beitrag zur Politischen Bildung im Geographieunterricht. In A. Budke & M. Kuckuck (Eds.), Politische Bildung im Geographieunterricht (pp. 211–219). Steiner. Eberth, A. (2019). Alltagskulturen in den Slums von Nairobi. Eine geographiedidaktische Studie zum kritisch-reflexiven Umgang mit Raumbildern. (Sozial- und Kulturgeographie 30). transcript, Bielefeld. Hernandez, B., Hidalgo, M.  C., & Ruiz, C. (2014). Theoretical and methodological aspects of research on place attachment. In L. C. Manzo & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment. Advances in theory, methods and applications (pp. 125–137). Routledge. Highmore, B. (Ed.). (2002). The everyday life reader. Routledge. Holloway, L., & Hubbard, P. (2001). People and place. The extraordinary geographies of everyday life. Routledge. Horton, J., & Kraftl, P. (2014). Cultural geographies. An Introduction. Routledge. KNBS: Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. (2010). 2009 Kenya population and housing census. Volume I A. Population Distribution by Administrative Units. Nairobi. Knox, P. L., & Marston, S. A. (2016). Human geography. Places and regions in global context (7th ed.). Pearson. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis. A guide to Methodes, practice and using software. Sage. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2010). Teaching geography 11–18. A conceptual approach. OUP. Luttrell, W., & Chalfen, R. (2010). Lifting up voices of participatory visual research. Visual Studies, 25(3), 197–200. Martin, F. (2006). Everyday geography. Primary Geographer (Autumn):4–7. Martin, F., & Griffiths, H. (2012). Power and representation: A postcolonial reading of global partnerships and teacher development through North-South study visits. British Educational Research Journal, 38(6), 907–927. Massey, D. (2005). For space. Sage. Mbembe, A. (2017). Critique of black reason. Duke University Press. Mbembe, A. (2019). Out of the dark night: Essays on decolonization. Columbia University Press. McLees, L. (2013). A postcolonial approach to urban studies: Interviews, mental maps, and photo voices on the urban farms of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The Professional Geographer, 62(2), 283–295. Mercer, C., Mohan, G., & Power, M. (2003). Towards a critical political geography of African development. Geoforum, 34, 419–436. Mizen, P., & Ofosu-Kusi, Y. (2006). Researching with, not on: Using photography in researching street children in Accra, Ghana. In M. Smith (Ed.), Negotiating boundaries and Borders: Qualitative methodology and development research (pp. 57–82). Emerald. Mizen, P., & Ofosu-Kusi, Y. (2010). Asking, giving, receiving: Friendship as a survival strategy among Accra’s street children. Childhood, 17(4), 441–545. Myers, G. (2001). Introductory human geography textbook representations of Africa. The Professional Geographer, 53(4), 522–532. Myers, G. (2011). African cities. Alternative visions of urban theory and practice. Zed.

10  Teaching About Space and Place: Everyday Geographies of Young People Living…

165

Njoroge, G. (2016). Trapped in the informal economy  – Is there any Hope for the youth? In H. Danner, M. Kerretts-Makau, & J. M. Nebe (Eds.), Youth unemployment in Kenya. A Ticking Time Bomb (pp. 138–148). Longhorn. Nuissl, H., & Heinrichs, D. (2013). Slums: Perspectives on the definition, the appraisal and the management of an urban phenomenon. Die Erde, 144(2), 105–116. Nyairo, J. (2006). (Re)configuring the City: The mapping of places and people in contemporary Kenyan popular song texts. In M. J. Murray & G. Myers (Eds.), Cities in contemporary Africa (pp. 71–94). Palgrave Macmillan. Ofosu-Kusi, Y. (2017). Informality as space: Children’s visualizations of streets and Markets in Accra, Ghana. In H.  Jahnke, A.  Schlottmann, & M.  Dickel (Eds.), Räume visualisieren (pp. 107–123). Readbox unipress. Pieterse, E. (2014). Filling the void: An agenda on tackling African urbanisation. In S. Parnell & E. Pieterse (Eds.), Africa’s urban revolution (pp. 200–220). Zed. Pile, S. (2010). Emotions and affect in recent human geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(1), 5–20. Power, M. (2006). Anti-racism, deconstruction and ‘overdevelopment’. Progress in Development Studies, 6(1), 24–39. Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. Pion. Rigg, J. (2007). An everyday geography of the global south. Routledge. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies. An introduction to researching with visual materials (4th ed.). Sage. Sana, O. (2016). Youth initiatives in response to the unemployment in Nairobi slums. In H. Danner, M. Kerretts-Makau, & J. M. Nebe (Eds.), Youth unemployment in Kenya. A Ticking Time Bomb (pp. 149–166). Longhorn. Simone, A., & Pieterse, E. (2017). New urban worlds. Inhabiting dissonant times. Polity. Tani, S., & Surma-aho, O. (2012). Young people and the hidden meanings of the everyday: Time-­ space path as a methodological opportunity. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Research, 21(3), 187–203. Tuan, Y. F. (1977). Space and place. The Perspective of Experience. University of Minnesota Press. Tuan, Y. F. (2016). Space and Place: Humanistic Perspective. In A. Escher & S. Petermann (Eds.), Raum und Ort (Basistexte Geographie 1) (pp. 133–166). Stuttgart. UNESCO. (n.d.). What do we mean by “youth”? http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-­and-­ human-­sciences/themes/youth/youth-­definition/. Accessed 9 May 2018. UN-Habitat. (2012). Korogocho streetscapes: Documenting the role and potentials of streets in citywide slum upgrading. UN-Habitat.

Chapter 11

From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People for Sustainable Production and Consumption Christiane Meyer and Christine Höbermann

11.1  Introduction The supply chain is often used as focus for economic geography and geographic education looking at global interdependencies, and the overall development and globalisation of the textile industry. “90 % of our clothes are produced in low-wage countries, mainly in Asia and therefore have to be transported half-way around the globe before being offered in our shops” (Banz, 2015, 15). This chapter reports on research undertaken in Germany that purports that this topic needs to be and can be recontextualised. The global challenges of this topic, referring to the fundamental concepts place, space, and scale (Lambert, 2009) for depicting the environmental and social problems of fast fashion along the textile chain and for questioning more sustainable approaches, have to be transformed “to become ‘educational knowledge’” (Firth, 2018, 278). For this topic it can, furthermore, be stated that “sustainable development is a quintessentially geographical notion (…) in the sense that decision making and activities relating to sustainability have to be geographically grounded and based on a sophisticated understanding of ‘how the world works’” (Freeman & Morgan, 2009, 29). The global and the local are connected in the context of the textile chain so that young people can “make sense of their own place, identity and contribution to the wider world” (Bourn & Leonard, 2009, 53). In the field of academic knowledge production the problems caused through an externalisation of social and ecological costs of the fast fashion industry are well-­ known (e.g. Sukhdev, 2012), with some calling for a new economic paradigm (e.g. Göpel, 2016; Raworth, 2017) as well as a societal transformation for sustainable C. Meyer (*) · C. Höbermann Hannover, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_11

167

168

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

production and consumption (e.g. WBGU, 2011). In addition, clothing “is an example of a field of action posing especially big challenges for a transformation process towards more sustainability” (Kleinhückelkotten & Neitzke, 2019, 240). With regard to recontextualisation, this geographical content also corresponds to the aims of the UNESCO Global Action Programme (GAP), striving for sustainable consumption and production as a key area of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) (UNESCO, 2014, 11 f.). The topic addresses some of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) set out in the agenda 2030 (UNESCO, 2017). “Education for Sustainable Development: Towards achieving the SDGs (ESD for 2030)” is the continuation of the GAP (UNESCO, 2019). In German geography curricula the topic is related to global challenges and sustainable development. In terms of the bigger picture of school education, this topic can be conducive to facilitating a transformative education and transformative literacy evidencing three forms of knowledge: systems knowledge, target knowledge and transformation knowledge (WBGU, 2011; Singer-Brodowski & Schneidewind, 2014). The documentary “The True Cost” by Andrew Morgan (2015), depicting that consumers in the shops of the Global North do not pay the true cost of clothing, motivated the authors to apply for an educational grant from the German Federal Environmental Foundation (DBU) in order to undertake a project about the textile supply chain. This was aimed at raising the awareness of young people in relation to sustainability and responsible consumerism of their clothing. This chapter outlines the project undertaken.

11.2  T  he Need for a New Economic Paradigm and a Societal Transformation In the field of knowledge production, amongst others in economic geography, the discourse about a new economic paradigm is becoming increasingly crucial with regard to sustainable development. Maja Göpel, general secretary of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), for example states: “the most critical aspect for turning the wheel toward fulfilling the SDGs is changing the economic paradigm “(2016, 3). This is not only an economical challenge but far more a societal task because “economic beliefs, values and assumptions are shaping how we think, feel and act” (Raworth, 2017, 5 referring to F.S. Michaels). Hence, economics “is the mother tongue of public policy, the language of public life and the mindset that shapes society” (ibid., 5). Furthermore, the “neoliberal faith in the benefits of choice and competition” (Lambert, 2019, 259) is reproduced in schools amongst others as an “examinations and testing culture” (ibid.). The economist Kate Raworth illustrates the challenges and aims for a sustainable thinking and acting in the metaphor of a doughnut, characterising it as a twenty-first century compass, providing “both an ecologically safe and socially just space for humanity” (ibid., 39). “Beyond the ecological ceiling lies an overshoot of pressure

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

169

on Earth’s life-giving systems” (ibid.) which are identified as planetary boundaries like climate change, land conversion or biodiversity loss (Raworth, 2017, 9). “Below the Doughnut’s social foundation lie shortfalls in human well-being” (ibid., 39) for example basics like sufficient food, clean water and decent sanitation or access to energy (ibid., 9). In this context, especially in educational processes, the problem of economic growth in the prevalent economic paradigm is worthy of discussion, for example referring to Tim Jackson’s book “Prosperity without growth”: “we have no alternative but to question growth. The myth of growth has failed us. [...] It has failed the fragile ecological systems on which we depend for survival” (2009, 15). In Germany, teaching material for global learning referring to this book is available (Rosa, 2016) as well as that relating to a post-growth economy by Niko Paech (2012). Although these issues of “the big picture” were not directly integrated in the teaching unit of our project (see below), it is important to keep them in mind since Fast Fashion is linked with the principle of economic growth. Its tremendous social and ecological impacts along the (textile) supply chain are presented in Table 11.1. The documentary “The True Cost” (like several other documentaries aiming at raising awareness for a non-sustainable fashion production) shows the impacts of the fashion industry in different regions of the world referring to the life situations of selected protagonists. A recent study, examining the working conditions in Sri Lankan garment factories of Primark and C&A, confirms serious deficits in terms of labour law like legal working hours, minimum wage and labour unions (CIR, 2019, Part 1, 11ff.), which are also demonstrated in “The True Cost”. This study also highlights some facts about the ‘true costs’ of Fast Fashion measured per year as expenses of human and ecological resources for textile industry (CIR, 2019, Part 3, 6ff.; data from 2015). In this way the textile industry contributes to overshoots and shortfalls concerning the above-mentioned doughnut (Raworth, 2017), for example: Table 11.1  Selected ecological and social problems along the (textile) supply chain (CIR, 2017, 6 f)

Social problems

Production of raw materials Serious human rights abuse (forced labour, lack of occupational health and safety), intransparency of wage payment…

Ecological GMO seeds and problems use of chemicals, groundwater pollution…

Production/ Processing Prohibition of labour unions and negotiations, low wages, considerable strain, discrimination and harassment… Toxic chemicals for dyeing, (fossil) energy consumption and emissions…

Logistics/Trade: Transport and Sale Unfair trade practice, work intensification in retail sale and logistics, precarity due to outsourcing, non-responsible pricing policy… Energy consumption and emissions due to long distances…

Consumption: Purchase, Use and Disposal Hazardous substances, ‘greenwashing’, bargain hunt, improper disposal…

(Packaging) waste (of clothing), export of toxic waste to other countries...

170

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

• 1458 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions (prediction for 2030 without transport emissions: 2800 million tons); • 43 million tons of chemicals: with increasing fibre production an increase per year of 3.5% is assumed; • biodiversity loss amongst others by monocultures and the use of pesticides: the rate of global species extinction is currently 1000 to 10,000 times higher than the natural extinction rate; • 92 million tons of waste (prediction for 2030: increase of 60%, hence, 148 million tons per year); • 60 million garment workers: 27 million of them with occupational diseases (estimations based on public media). With respect to the goal of economic growth in SDG 8, the agenda 2030 seems to proclaim ‘business as usual’. For a change of the economic paradigm a transition into a circular economy is necessary in line with eco-design and prices calculating the true costs of a product. Apart from the concepts ‘True Cost, True Pricing and True Taxation’ other approaches like De-Growth, Sufficiency (e.g. Kern & Vogt, 2016, 144ff.), Post-growth Economy (Paech, 2012) or the Economy for the Common Good (Felber & Hagelberg, 2017) belong to the discourse of knowledge production. For educational processes discussing all these approaches without context would be exhausting. Fashion is an appropriate context since it works “as a resonator for personal identity and the formulation of a lifestyle statement or a life script which is at stake” (Banz, 2015, 13). In terms of the need of a societal transformation, Fast Fashion is a suitable context for scrutinising the impacts of economics in our everyday life and Slow Fashion is an example of where alternative approaches might be applied.

11.3  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion There exists no consistent definition of Fast Fashion and Slow Fashion. Nevertheless, some characteristics are outlined in Table 11.2. Table 11.2 reveals that Slow Fashion “is not simply the opposite of Fast Fashion, it is much more than that. Slow Fashion is a change in people’s way of thinking” (Wolf, 2015, 18). The transition from Fast to Slow Fashion involves a change in the way of production as well as the way of consumption. However, a severe lack of transparency is one of the greatest challenges along the textile chain, hence, for a lot of consumers it is difficult to judge whether or not clothing was sustainably produced (Kleinhückelkotten & Neitzke, 2019, 243ff.). Textile labels are able to bridge the interests of both stakeholders: for the companies they serve as an obvious ‘sign’ for the principles and values of their vision, for the (critical) consumer they are a means of orientation and helpful for decision-­ making. Because of the wide range of different signs, it is challenging to find orientation in this “label labyrinth” (CIR, 2017). Therefore, it is inevitable to know more

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

171

Table 11.2 Characteristics of Fast Fashion and Slow Fashion (Banz, 2015; Wolf, 2015; Kleinhückelkotten & Neitzke, 2019) Production/ supply side

Consumption/ demand side

Fast fashion Mass-produced, frequently copies of high-end designs, high number of collections (per year), putting as many low-price garments on the market as possible Main goal: High quantity Speeding everything up: Globalisation of mainstream fashion, production and trade (from the design to the delivery of the finished garments within 2 weeks is possible) Low price segment with tremendous social and ecological impacts not valued in the prices “Fast consumer” in a throwaway society: Buying more than needed, short use phase of clothes and wearing out

Slow fashion Production at fair and ecologically justifiable conditions: Sustainability is incorporated in the designs of fashion, which is timeless, customised, and multifunctional Main goal: High quality Slowing down acceleration: Responsibility and respect towards people, the environment and the products themselves

Medium to high price segment corresponding to the real value “Slow consumer” in a responsible society: Buying less and more consciously in favour of high-quality clothing and production under ecologically and socially acceptable conditions Second-hand, clothing swap and share, principles like DIY, repair, recycling, upcycling, zero waste, cradle to cradle

about the criteria behind such labels like Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), Fair Trade or Fair Wear Foundation. Furthermore, NGOs (like CIR) evaluate relevance and credibility of common labels. For instance, GOTS is an ideal for ecological criteria whereas the membership in Fair Wear Foundation is a role model for social criteria. In our project we especially focused on labels which are classified as highly credible in relation to ecological or social criteria. However, referring to a representative survey by Greenpeace (2015) with 500 young people aged 12 to 19 about their attitudes and consumption patterns concerning fair and ecological fashion a lot of them knew about these problems but their preferred brands were Fast Fashion-stores, thus, it appears that their knowledge has no impact on their behaviour. This phenomenon is known as mind-behaviour gap (e.g. Entzian, 2015), and in case of positive attitudes towards sustainable products but non-sustainable buying patterns it is described as attitude-behaviour gap (e.g. Jacobs et al., 2018). Furthermore, a recent study reveals that other buying criteria, like comfort and correct fit, good price-performance ratio or good workmanship, are as important as or even more important than sustainability criteria for consumers. In addition, there are reservations with respect to sustainably produced and second-­ hand clothing that they are not fashionable or that the assortment is too small (Kleinhückelkotten & Neitzke, 2019, 242ff.).

172

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

11.4  The Need for an Education for Transformation Set against this context it is obvious that an education for a “profound transformation of how we think and act” (UNESCO, 2017, 7) is challenging. “To create a more sustainable world (…), individuals must become sustainability change-makers” (UNESCO, 2017, 7). The question is how far it would be possible to contribute to this movement using educational processes. The idea of our project is to deal with companies that can be described as sustainability change-makers since a transformation “relies heavily on the change agents” (WBGU, 2011, 6). They are characterised by “questioning ‘business as usual’ policies and creating alternative practices, thereby challenging the established world views and paths, attitudinal and behavioural patterns” (WGBU, 2011, 243 referring to Kristof 2010). In terms of the recontextualisation of geography as a subject and contributing to an ‘educational big picture’ we would like “to help learners develop a sustainability worldview” (Nolet, 2016, 62) with our project. “(A) sustainability worldview is a holistic phenomenon that involves a combination of values, knowledge, dispositions, and agency” (Nolet, 2016, 64, accentuation in original). Alun Morgan, for instance, argues that “geography educators have a key responsibility in the shaping of learners’ geographical world-views” (2011, 200) and that geography education around the globe “is increasingly discussed as a potential vehicle for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)” (ibid., 190). Victor Nolet points out several thinking capabilities that are especially important for developing a sustainability worldview: adaptive expertise, critical thinking, decision-making, systems thinking and character strengths (ibid. 2016, 108). Of course, a small educational project is only a little step in this direction. Nevertheless, it is helpful to create a vision for this aim. In this context, an orientation, not least for values education (e.g. Hopwood, 2008; Meyer, 2018), could look like “nested systems” (Nolet, 2016, 44), illustrating that “the economy is subset of human society and that a healthy economy depends on healthy social and human systems (…). At the same time, humans are part of and depend on various environmental systems and earth systems” (ibid., 44). In ‘the house of nested systems’ in Fig.  11.1 the overall guiding principle (in the roof) for collective and individual decisions is a sustainability worldview. This worldview is related to culture. With regard to a real transition in the clothing sector, “a cultural shift is necessary” (Kleinhückelkotten & Neitzke, 2019, 247). A transformative education “generates an understanding of action paths and possible solutions” and is furthermore “responsible for creating a basic general problem awareness” (ibid., 23). The teacher’s evaluative rules in the field of reproduction are decisive in terms of their role as “powerful agents of change” (UNESCO, 2014, 19) in geography education. Since such aspects like transformative education are not implemented in current geography curricula (in Germany) teachers need an orientation, i.a. the forms of knowledge like systems, target and transformation knowledge (Singer-Brodowski & Schneidewind, 2014, 131, see Fig.  11.2). Systems knowledge includes the problem analysis and the reasons for the non-sustainable

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

173

Fig. 11.1  ‘House of nested systems’ for collective and individual decisions guided by a sustainability worldview. (Design: C. Meyer)

Fig. 11.2  Knowledge basis of transformative literacy with a focus on fashion. (Design: C. Meyer; following Singer-Brodowski & Schneidewind, 2014)

situation in the social and ecological systems (ibid., 134). Target knowledge focuses on (individual and collective) visions for the future and judgements in terms of sustainability (ibid., 134), like for companies the certification with high credibility labels. Transformation knowledge is an understanding of the conditions for realising the vision, based on actions for the constitution of the transition process and the dissemination of the concrete vision (Singer-Brodowski & Schneidewind, 2014,

174

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

131). Values are placed in the centre of Fig. 11.2 because they “represent our guiding principles: our broadest motivations, influencing the attitudes we hold and how we act” (PIRC, 2011, 8) and, thus, they are related to all knowledge forms. The three knowledge forms as a whole are described as transformative literacy, i.e. “the ability to read and utilize information about societal transformation processes, to accordingly interpret and get actively involved in these processes” (Schneidewind, 2013 in Göpel, 2016, 10). It is proposed that transformative literacy corresponds to the aims of ESD (Singer-Brodowski & Schneidewind, 2014, 137). Hence, it serves as orientation in our educational project for the development of teaching units.

11.5  T  he Educational Project: Sustainability Awareness along the ‘Textile Chain’ When I go shopping, I don’t care from where it is and how it is produced (male, age 17, 2018; translated by authors). For me, it is important, that clothing is produced ecologically, but I don’t know if I really care about it at the end (male, age 16, 2018; translated by authors).

The educational project outlined in this chapter covers the period 2017–2020 (see Fig. 11.3). The first part of the project involved creating a product by means of an “education of participation” (WBGU, 2011, 23). It was planned that pupils at cooperating schools and students from our university should conduct interviews with fashion enterprises with the view to being seen as pioneers of change for sustainable production. This is an example of recontextualising geography with a connection to an education for transformation since we had to select suitable fashion companies respecting up-to-date research findings and also develop a teaching unit that prepared students adequately for the subsequent filmed interviews. The second part of the project centred on creating video clips of this film material to embed within teaching units. Additionally, it was hoped that the teaching units would be able to contribute to transformative literacy, hence, transformative education.

11.5.1  Selection of Companies and Preparation for Interviews To enact the project, five model companies as pioneers of change with a collective vision and strategy for systemic change had to be selected. This was done with the help of a panel of experts from different expert fields (environmental and human rights NGOs, unions, sustainability consultants, higher education institutions, designers and public administration) (see Fig. 11.3). The criteria for the selection were differentiated in practical needs like the distance and costs for a visit of the enterprise with respect to the project budget and, above all, ecological, social, and

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

175

Fig. 11.3  Course of the project Table 11.3  Sustainability criteria for the selection of suitable companies Ecology/environmental protection Organic or recycled origin of raw material (e.g. GOTS certified) No GMO seeds Avoidance of hazardous substances (Greenpeace detox) Renewable energy supply Less waste design Emission, transportation Packaging Recyclability

Social justice Compliance with workers’ rights (e.g. fundamental ILO Conventions, ILO 2019), OHS Occupational Health and Safety) Reliable payment, implementation of living wages Participation in multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSI) Fair trade standards

Political behaviour Participation in sector initiatives Legal situation at production sites Acceptance of environmental and social costs at production countries (i.e. pay taxes)

political criteria concerning sustainability of the company in question (see Table 11.3). Furthermore, it was necessary with regard to the development of the teaching units that the selected companies were different in their size and company profile. We focused on small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) but for efficiency in terms of publicity and the quantity of consumption, one large-scale enterprise

176

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

was included. Moreover, we tried to consider teenagers’ preferences, with the clothing of the companies being considered stylish by young people. Four of the five companies, which were selected out of 20 enterprises, participated in the project (see Table 11.4). After the company selection process, we worked with two schools in Hannover, Germany and then with three classes for the preparation of the interviews. In the summer of 2018, bachelor students were introduced to the project. The interview schedules were based on the interests of the participating young people. Although the related teaching unit had some influence on their knowledge and choices, it was interesting to observe what questions the young people chose to put in the schedules. A central focus for the project was to find out: Which aspects are especially meaningful for the young people? The questions raised included: • What motivates Tchibo to promote sustainability? • How important are economic considerations in Melawear’s business model? • How does Brands Fashion guarantee just working conditions, with regard to Fairtrade? • How does the Fair Wear Foundation conduct an audit in a factory which is cooperating with Armedangels? One important aspect to be investigated was the motivation of enterprises to put an emphasis on sustainability and as well as interest in the brands’ values. In addition, the young people wanted to know how the companies implemented their vision and values like ecological compatibility, social justice and economic performance notwithstanding the prevalent economic paradigm. Furthermore, the students used the conversations with company representatives for questioning credibility and

Table 11.4  Founding year, size and main labels of the participating companies (updated in August 2019) Name of brand/ company Melawear

Founded Staff 2014 13

Armedangels

2007

96

Brands fashion (shirts for life)

2002

160

Tchibo

1949

Approx. 12.100

Main certifications/memberships Fairtrade (cotton, textile standard), GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard), Cradle to Cradle (C2C), Partnership for Sustainable Textiles (PST; founded by German minister for economic cooperation and development) Fairtrade cotton, Fair Wear Foundation, GOTS, cooperation with PETA Amfori (BEPI, BSCI), Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI), Fairtrade (cotton, textile standard), GOTS, Global Recycled Standard (GRS), ACCORD on fire and building safety in Bangladesh, PST Cotton made in Africa (CmiA), GOTS, ACT (Action, Collaboration, Transformation), GRS, PST, WE (Worldwide Enhancement of Social Quality), ACCORD

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

177

control mechanisms. Finally, there were enquiries about operational details like wages, occupational health and safety, transportation, and packaging for online demands. The preparation of the participating pupils for conducting the interviews was vital since they had only isolated knowledge available before embarking on the project. Even the university students, who had had lectures in economic geography, did not know much about this topic. Therefore, the mind-set and vision of each company that was interviewed was interesting for the students.

11.5.2  Video Clips and Teaching Units The interview with the company was very interesting, because it provides first-hand information about what companies are doing. (female, age 16, 2018, translated by authors). I enjoyed the project days because we learned a lot about clothing. I liked conducting interviews with people in the shopping mall because that was a new experience. (female, age 16, 2019, translated by authors)

In the next stage of the project, the filmed interviews were used to generate short video clips (3 to 7 min.), to be used as teaching material (see Fig. 11.3). The appropriateness of these clips in relation to the interests of pupils, level of language and technical terminology, intelligibility and the necessity of further information material, was tested in school classes of different school forms. The research question being: To what extent are the video clips appropriate for different school forms and different levels? After the first testing of the video clips it was obvious that they had to be improved, e.g. by fading in crucial words or information. Nevertheless, after this redesign some pupils and also some students in our seminars commented as follows: “Hard to understand due to the mass of technical terms” (male, age 15, April 2019, translated by authors). Therefore, we provided explanations of the technical terms. The testing of the video clips with these supporting materials started in June 2019. Overall, the pupils were interested in the video clips and they remarked afterwards that they had learned a lot about the production and, moreover, that they know how they could change something, e.g. by looking for certain labels while shopping. In this phase of the project the first conception of the teaching units, created with respect to the different knowledge forms of a transformative literacy (see Fig. 11.2 and Table 11.5), was also tested. The mind-perception gap was crucial in terms of the goal of a societal transformation. Based on research about environmental awareness and engagement, Annett Entzian (2015) points out that the perception is not only influenced by cognition but also especially linked with emotional factors. A change in behaviour was in the first instance caused by emotions (ibid., 210). Respecting her results, the students should be deeply touched and moved (Meyer

178

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

Table 11.5  Teaching units and time of surveys at a glance Systems Knowledge (Textile Chain – Cotton Production and Processing) Pre-study: Lower Questionnaire no. 1 secondary 1. “Web of level (grade 9/10) connectedness” (see Project unit: Fig. 11.4) Three days, 2. Analysing data each day six (focusing on cotton production and lessons à processing, locating 45 min) them in a world map) 3. Selected sequences of “the true cost” 4. Dimensions of sustainability (society, ecology, economy) 5. Making enquiries about the production of liked brands/ companies Lower and Pre-study: Questionnaire no. 1 upper 1. Selected secondary sequences of “the level true cost” (grades 2. Dimensions of 10–13) sustainability Regular class: Three (society, ecology, economy) double-­ 3. Making enquiries lessons á about the production 90 min. of liked brands/ companies

Target and Transformation Knowledge (Selected Enterprises) 1. Analysing the sustainability performance of each enterprise with the videoclips and further information about the enterprise, using criteria focusing on society and ecology (teamworking) 2. Creating a poster and presenting the main results to the class 3. Comparison and rating of the four enterprises concerning their sustainability performance Evaluation of the videos: Questionnaire no. 2 4. “What can we do” – Planning an action for the next day

Target and Transformation Knowledge (Society and Individuals) 1. Implementation of the planned actions, e.g. a survey in school with regard to ‘fashion for future’, making enquiries in the internet for clothing which is stylish and eco-fair produced or for eco-fair produced T-shirts which are created for the class after the final exams (teamworking), conducting interviews in clothing stores 2. Presenting and discussing the results 3. Flashlight: “What have we learned?” – Closing meeting about the teaching unit Post-study: Questionnaire no. 3

1. Analysing the sustainability performance of each enterprise with the videoclips and further information using criteria for society, ecology and economy (teamworking) 2. Creating a poster and presenting the main results to the class 3. Comparison and rating of the four enterprises Evaluation of the videos: Questionnaire no. 2

1. Different possibilities (some of them are not tested so far): Creating a narrative scenario like an “internalisation society” or a “slow fashion society” in 2030 (storytelling), blog comments about sustainable consumption of clothes 2. Presenting and discussing the outcomes 3. Flashlight: “What have we learned” Post-study: Questionnaire no. 3

2018), which was realised with three selected sequences of the documentary “The True Cost” (Mittrach and Höbermann 2018), showing protagonists which were affected in different ways by the fashion industry: 1. Cotton production practices in India (time: 26:12–31:13): farmer suicides because of debts on big companies with the monopoly on expensive GMO seeds (Bt-cotton) and the chemicals used (explained by the Indian environmental

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

179

Fig. 11.4  Result of the “Web of Connectedness”. (Photo: C. Meyer, August 2019)

a­ ctivist Vandana Shiva); children were born with severe mental and physical disabilities because of the excessive use of pesticides in the Punjab region. 2. Collapse of Rana Plaza in 2013 in Dhaka, Bangladesh (time: 8:15–9:48): television news and a lot of covered funerals; more than 1000 workers died; one survivor describes her situation first-hand  – on account of this collapse she is confined to a wheelchair. 3. Life circumstances of the worker Shima Akhter in Dhaka, Bangladesh (time 55:11–59:43): she describes her working situation in a garment factory and her private situation as a mother of a young girl, who has to grow up in the village with her grandparents. Shima Akhter appeals very emotionally to consumers in the Global North not to buy clothing which is produced by the blood of workers in garment factories – referring to the Rana Plaza collapse. Careful selection of the clips ensured that they were suitable for the pupils. Pupils were interested and could remember the situations shown in the final reflection of the teaching unit (see Table 11.5). Concerning the teaching units (Table  11.5) we had previous good experience with the “Web of Connectedness” (an idea we got on a workshop about implementing the Earth Charter in German schools, see comment in Jimenez and Williamson 2014, 25ff.) as an introduction to systems knowledge (Mittrach and Stolze 2018). It shows not only the interconnectedness of the textile chain (see Fig.  11.4) with

180

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

appropriate pictures but, moreover, at the same time exposes the previous knowledge of the participating pupils while explaining their chosen picture and the connection to another one in the circle. We recommend the following steps in the circle: 1. In the centre of the circle different motives are placed on the ground which are related to the global interdependencies of textile production (e.g. a map showing different locations of the production process), to different problems along the textile chain (see Table 11.1), (stylish) clothing and their costs or to the certification by well-known labels (like Fair Trade). The number of pictures should be higher than the number of students in the circle. 2. Every participant chooses one picture. Afterwards each person describes his or her associations with the motive explaining also why it was chosen. 3. Then a ball of thread is given to one student who has then to explain a connection of his/her own motive to that of another person in the circle. While explaining, the ball of thread is given to this second person, the first person holds on the end of the thread. This process is repeated until everyone is connected in the developing web. 4. In the last step a reflection is initiated: What is the symbolic expression of this web? Which motives could be added for illustrating the global interdependencies? Are the global interdependencies positive or negative with regard to the supply side, the demand side and a sustainable production? Whose profit and whose risks are connected with the textile chain? Can we change something with regard to the problems? After the explanation of the dimensions of sustainability, primarily focusing on society and ecology (see Table 11.3), the pupils make enquiries about brands they like. When considering these types of issues, it is helpful to use a website like “good on you” (https://goodonyou.eco/). Afterwards, pupils can add criteria for sustainability, if necessary. The criteria of “good on you” should also be discussed critically. The pupils appeared to enjoy working in groups and, moreover, creating outcomes based on their own ideas (day 2 and 3). Furthermore, they liked enquiry-­ based learning like conducting the interviews. Comments to the open-ended questions in the final questionnaire (see Table 11.5) included: I especially enjoyed that not only problems were presented as usually, but that we discussed concrete possibilities to improve the situation in the last lesson (male, age 16, 2018, translated by authors).

11.6  Concluding Remarks and Outlook “I don’t want anyone wearing anything that is produced by our blood.” – Thinking about this statement by Shima Akhter in “The True Cost”, a movie that matters (van Zoelen, 2016), we were motivated to raise awareness of sustainable production and consumption of “our” clothing in the context of ESD and a societal transformation. Hence, the superordinate research question of our project was:

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

181

To what extent can the teaching unit contribute to transformative literacy respectively transformative education? Apart from our experiences of delivering the teaching units, the answers to the three questionnaires were significant in relation to this question. Initial evaluations indicate that a sensitisation for sustainability especially in the three-day project units took place. I appreciate that we know and understand more about the situation in the environment now. (female, age 17, in 2019; translated by authors) I like that we paid attention to the people, who are producing our clothes. (female, age 16, 2019; translated by authors)

In relation to our aim of raising the awareness of young people for the need of sustainable production and consumption, the teaching unit in regular class as a shorter version for teachers to use with support from our educational remarks (Table 11.5) needs an in-depth planning. Thus, we are still thinking of improving the third lesson (á 90 min.) for lower and upper secondary level in regular classes. Since we do not want to influence or manipulate the pupils in their individual consumer behaviour, it seems to be reasonable, to create narrative scenarios, e.g. for a transformed society as the “internalisation society” (in Welzer 2019, 232ff.) or a “slow fashion society”. However, because of the complexity of the topic and our aim we recommend project units. In relation to this, a pupil comments on the third questionnaire: “I enjoyed that I learned something new about production and that I know that I can change something.” (female, age 15, 2019; translated by authors) Due to a lack of time, we could not provide a matured educational task for the third part of the study. However, the planning and realisation of a “green fashion tour” (Perrottet and Nicoletti 2018), respecting ‘young people’s geographies’ and contributing to “critical thinking skills, promotion of a values base around social (and environmental) justice and a belief that positive change is possible” (Bourn and Leonard 2009, 60), might be effective. The last step of our project will be the dissemination of the teaching units on a website (www.fashionforfuture-­education.net) and to teachers in training. One particular challenge for this dissemination online will be to give appropriate assistance to teachers as well as to create self-explanatory teaching materials. “My God, we can do better than this!”  – is one statement from the “leading economist Richard Wolff” (van Zoelen, 2016) in “The True Cost”. In our project we show and discuss with pupils, how ‘we’ can do better, and we conclude that dealing with pioneers of change like model enterprises for sustainability is a constructive contribution to transformative education and an example of how geography in the classroom can be effectively recontextualised to better suit the interests of pupils and the needs of the world.

182

C. Meyer and C. Höbermann

References Banz, C. (2015). Fast fashion – The dark sides of fashion. In S. Schulze & C. Banz (Eds.), Fast Fashion – The dark sides of fashion (pp. 13–15). Hamburg: Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe Hamburg. Bourn, D., & Leonard, A. (2009). Living in the wider world – The global dimension. In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Living geography (Exciting Futures for teachers and students) (pp.  53–65). London: Chris Kington Publishing. CIR: Christliche Initiative Romero (Ed.). (2017). Ein Wegweiser durch das Label-Labyrinth. Münster: CIR. CIR: Christliche Initiative Romero (Ed.). (2019). Fast Fashion  – Eine Bilanz in 3 Teilen. Münster: CIR. Entzian, A. (2015). Denn sie tun nicht, was sie wissen (Eine Studie zu ökologischem Bewusstsein und Handeln). München: oekom. Felber, C., & Hagelberg, G. (2017). The economy for common good. A workable, transformative ethics-based alternative. https://thenextsystem.org/sites/default/files/2017-­08/FelberHagelberg. pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2019. Firth, R. (2018). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed., pp. 275–286). London/New York: Routledge. Freeman, D., & Morgan, A. (2009). Living in the future  – Education for sustainable development. In D.  Mitchell (Ed.), Living geography (Exciting Futures for teachers and students) (pp. 29–52). London: Chris Kington Publishing. Göpel, M. (2016). The great Mindshift. How a new economic paradigm and sustainability transformations go hand in hand. Berlin: Springer. Greenpeace (Ed.) (2015). Usage & Attitude Mode unter Jugendlichen. Ergebnisbericht 30. Januar 2015. https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/publications/mode-­unter-­ jugendlichen-­greenpeace-­umfrage.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2019. Hopwood, N. (2008). Values in geographic education: The challenge of attending to learner’s perspectives. Oxford Review of Education, 34(5), 589–608. ILO: International Labour Organisation. (2019). Time to act for SDG 8: Integrating decent work, sustained growth and environmental integrity. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/ public/%2D%2D-­d greports/%2D%2D-­i nst/documents/publication/wcms_712685.pdf. Accessed 26 Aug 2019. Jackson, T. (2009). Prosperity without growth. Economics for a finite planet. London, Sterling VA: Earthscan. Jacobs, K., Petersen, L., Hörisch, J., & Battenfeld, D. (2018). Green thinking but thoughtless buying? An empirical extension of the value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy in sustainable clothing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 203, 1155–1169. Jimenez, A., & Williamson, D. F. (Eds.). (2014). The heart of the matter. Infusing sustainability values in education. Experiences of ESD with the Earth Charter. http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/invent/images/uploads/ESD%20EC%202014.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2019. Kern, J., & Vogt, A. (2016). Future. Fashion. Economics. A guide to future-oriented, responsible economic thinking in the fashion industry. Frankfurt am Main: dfv. Kleinhückelkotten, S., & Neitzke, H.-P. (2019). Increasing sustainability in clothing production and consumption – Opportunities and constraints. Gaia, 28(S1), 240–248. Lambert, D. (2019). On the knotty question of ‘Recontextualising’ geography. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(4), 257–261. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/10382046.2019.1657687 Lambert, D. (2009). Introduction – Part 1: What is living geography? In D. Mitchell (Ed.), Living geography (pp.  1–7). Exciting Futures for teachers and students. London: Chris Kington Publishing. Meyer, C. (2018). Raising awareness for transformation  – The significance of values education for sustainable development. In IGU, Institute of Geography of Russian Academy of

11  From Fast Fashion to Slow Fashion – Raising Awareness of Young People…

183

Sciences (Eds.), Practical geography and XXI century challenges (Conference Book Part 2, pp. 369–377). Moscow: IGU. Mittrach, S., & Höbermann, C. (2018) “The True Cost – Who pays the price for our clothing?”: Eine kritische Analyse der Fast Fashion-Industrie im Kontext von Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung und -bewusstsein. In C. Meyer & A. Eberth (Eds.), Filme für die Erde – Unterrichtsanregungen zum Lernbereich „Globale Entwicklung“ im Kontext einer Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung (Hannoversche Materialien zur Didaktik der Geographie 1) (pp. 81–101). Hannover: Leibniz Universität Hannover. Mittrach, S., & Stolze, J. E. (2018). Die Erd-Charta – Potenziale für Schule und Unterricht im Kontext von Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung. In C. Meyer & A. Eberth (Eds.), Filme für die Erde – Unterrichtsanregungen zum Lernbereich „Globale Entwicklung“ im Kontext einer Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung (Hannoversche Materialien zur Didaktik der Geographie 1) (pp. 32–37). Hannover: Leibniz Universität Hannover. Morgan, A. (2015). The true cost. https://truecostmovie.com. Accessed 8 Aug 2019. Morgan, A. (2011). Morality and geography education. In G. Butt (Ed.), Geography, education and the future (pp. 187–205). London: Continuum. Nolet, V. (2016). Educating for Sustainability. Principles and practices for teachers. New York: Routledge. Paech, N. (2012). Liberation from excess (The road to a post-growth economy). München: oekom. Perrottet, A., & Nicoletti, A. (2018). Green Fashion Tours – Stadttouren zu nachhaltiger Mode. In P.  Heinrich (Ed.), CSR und fashion (Nachhaltiges Management in der Bekleidungs- und Textilbranche) (pp. 121–131). Berlin: Springer Gabler. PIRC: Public Interest Research Centre (Ed.). (2011). The common cause handbook. https:// publicinterest.org.uk/download/values/Common%20Cause%20Handbook.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2019. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics. 7 ways to think like a 21st century economist. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. Rosa, L. (2016). Aspekte einer Postwachstums-Ökonomie (Globales Lernen  – Hamburger Unterrichtsmodelle zum KMK-Orientierungsrahmen Globale Entwicklung). Hamburg: LI. Schneidewind, U. (2013). Transformative literacy. Understanding and shaping societal transformations. Gaia, 22(2), 82–86. Singer-Brodowski, M., & Schneidewind, U. (2014) Transformative Literacy. Gesellschaftliche Veränderungsprozesse verstehen und gestalten. In FORUM Umweltbildung im Umweltdachverband (Ed.) Krisen- und Transformationsszenarios: Frühkindpädagogik, Resilienz & Weltaktionsprogramm (pp. 131–140). Wien: Forum Umweltbildung. Sukhdev, P. (2012). Corporation 2020 (Transforming business for tomorrow’s world). Washington DC: Island Press. UNESCO. (2014). UNESCO roadmap for implementing the global action programme on education for sustainable development. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals (Learning Objectives). Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (2019). Future of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). https://en.unesco.org/ esdfor2030. Accessed 31 Dec 2019. WBGU: German Advisory Council on Global Change. (2011). World in transition (A Social Contract for Sustainability). Berlin: WBGU. Welzer, H. (2019). Alles könnte anders sein. Eine Gesellschaftsutopie für freie Menschen. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer. Wolf, M. (2015). The slow fashion movement  – Or, whoa there, not so fast! In S.  Schulze & C. Banz (Eds.), Fast fashion – The dark sides of fashion (pp. 18–20). Hamburg: Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe Hamburg. van Zoelen, R. (2016). Movies that Matter: A revolution of values in the fashion industry. https:// www.duurzamestudent.nl/2016/03/18/movies-­t hat-­m atter-­a -­r evolution-­o f-­values-­i n-­t he-­ fashion-­industry/. Accessed 24 Aug 2019.

Chapter 12

Conclusion Mary Fargher, David Mitchell, and Emma Till

12.1  R  eflecting on the Contribution of ‘Recontextualising Geography in Educationy’ First and foremost, this book has re-affirmed why geography in education matters more than ever. The unprecedented events of the last year have served to strengthen the editors’ belief in the significance of geography’s contribution to young people’s education. Geographical knowledge has the potential to transform how young people understand their planet and our human relationships with it. This is even more significant in the context of challenges facing the earth in the current Anthropocene epoch when human activities have made substantial negative impacts on the planet’s climate and ecosystems (Lambert, Beneker and Bladh, Chap. 2). In this way, we are reminded of Alastair Bonnett’s description of geography as a project both for survival and to make sense of what can seem a chaotic world (Bonnett, 2008). Geography is rooted in the human need for survival; in the necessity of knowing and making sense of the resources and dangers of our human and physical environment. But it also seeks the bigger picture: geography helps us imagine that there is meaning and sense in the world. Geography allows us to see order in, and impose order on, what otherwise would be chaos. (Bonnett, 2008, p. 112)

The book has reasserted that realising geography’s educative potential is hard won and is not a given. In his article On the Knotty Question of Recontextualising Geography, Lambert (2019) reminds us of the need for careful consideration of the M. Fargher (*) · D. Mitchell Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] E. Till University of Winchester, Winchester, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Fargher et al. (eds.), Recontextualising Geography in Education, International Perspectives on Geographical Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73722-1_12

185

186

M. Fargher et al.

challenges of engaging wholeheartedly with recontextualising geography in education but also of the rewards that can be had: In the case of geography then, recontextualisation is a particularly tricky idea and should be treated with caution. But teaching with intellectual honesty does require us to engage in some way with the untidy and unruly ‘discipline’ of geography to help us imagine a ‘school subject’ that can truly contribute to the process of education. (Lambert, 2019, p. 260)

Lambert’s view, that recontextualisation is challenging in geography and needs to be approached carefully can be identified in the perspectives of the authors of ‘Recontextualising Geography in Education’. The book contributes further to the argument that school geography is enriched by those rising to the challenge and reimagining the subject in ways that establish what makes geographical thinking powerful for young people in understanding their world. This may seem like a relatively obvious reflection on a book where all of the authors are geographers, geography educators and geography teachers. However, what their collective commentaries represent are evidence from key stakeholders involved in thinking about, critiquing, re-imagining and enacting processes of recontextualising geography in education. The potential centres mainly on teachers, as agents of change (Healy, Chap. 6), doing the kind of ‘hard curriculum thinking’ (Spielman, 2018) that is discussed in the theorising recontextualisation chapters in the first part of the book. Part of this involves them in the tricky selection and transformation of geography knowledge created in the universities into a form that is appropriate for schools (Firth, 2017). Connected with this initial challenge is the very complex nature of geography knowledge itself. Bernstein’s (2000) theory offers us a useful framework within which to consider the goal and substance of geography’s knowledge. At the very least it directs us to take seriously the inherent differences in types of knowledge. (Vernon, 2016, p.103)

As a subject known more for its ‘horizontality’ rather than ‘verticality’, it is difficult to apply Bernstein’s pedagogic device in ways that are easier to access in school subjects such as science (Kitson, 2020). The book has challenged the reader to re-imagine the processes of recontextualisation in ways that are appropriate to geography and in how it can be effectively taught. For example, it has explored the selection and formulation of geography’s ‘big ideas’, reflecting on the order of geography knowledge and re-imagined a hierarchical approach to constructing the concepts of place and space in school geography (Maude, Chap. 3). With direct reference to Bernstein’s original model, it has presented alternative ways of thinking about the relationships between the academic discipline and the school subject. In particular, this has involved an alternative spatial imaginary (Finn, Chap. 4), where geography knowledge is produced by a wider network of agents including the teacher, the academic and the teacher educator. Specific reflection on the challenges of recontextualising geography in primary education has provided new perspectives on the use of different knowledge lenses to enrich and broaden the experience of the primary-aged geographer (Catling, Chap. 6).

12 Conclusion

187

An area which is currently under-represented in the existing literature is the place of students and their agency in recontextualising geography. This has also been considered with regards to the centrality of teachers paying much closer attention to their interpretations of geographical knowledge and the significance of interactions between the teacher and sixth-form students in transformation knowledge processes (Whittall, Chap. 7). The kinds of instructional discourse that university teachers can employ in developing specific knowledge and understanding of geography under-graduates in making connections between geography’s key concepts were explored in an American university research project (Muniz-Solari, Chap. 8). The idea of interpreting recontextualisation as a continuous process of teachers contextualising geographical concepts for their students was investigated through a school-based research project in Germany (Serwene, Chap. 9). This project recontextualised geography’s key concepts of place and space by combining aspects of emotional and everyday geographies (Eberth, Chap. 10). In a unique collaboration between teachers, their students and fashion companies, the concept of sustainability was recontextualised to further develop young people’s knowledge and understanding of fast and slow fashion (Meyer and Hobermann, Chap. 11).

12.2  R  ecommendations for Future Recontextualising Geography in Education In this the final part of the book, we consider how we can move further forward in recontextualising geography in education. We explore specifically what is needed and why and how this can happen.

12.2.1  What Is Needed? We propose that a redefining (and a re-imagining) of geography as a school subject in teachers’ minds and actions is needed – Geography as a subject to be made, built of disctinctive concepts and ways of thinking and doing. This book has used the idea of recontextualisation, at many levels, to show that geography is open in this way. We see the teacher as the key agent of change in recontextualising geography in education, and so they need to be encouraged, educated and supported to take on this role. This is not to say that the role of knowledge production in academic geography and elsewhere is to be ignored, quite the opposite in fact, but teachers need a conception of geographical knowledge production (and recontextualisation) and their key role in that, if the educational value of geography is to be fully realised. In terms of geography education research, we see Bernstein’s model of recontextualisation as a powerful conceptual tool for understanding knowledge in

188

M. Fargher et al.

curriculum. However, this book has highlighted the limits to and limitations of a Bernsteinian approach and we suggest that new models of recontextualisation need to be researched and developed to support the re-imagining of school geography.

12.2.2  Why Is This Needed? The Anthropocene era of accelerating social, economic and environmental challenge for humankind gives an urgency to geographers and geography educators’ who ask the questions about geographical knowledge and its value. We see geography, the school subject, as needing to evolve if we are to move forward in developing a progressive geography curriculum. Teachers are the central agents of change in the construction of geography (and its recontextualisation) as it lives in the classroom, but more than they realise. Performativity and accountability pressures on teachers has hollowed out their sense of geography curriculum (and knowledge) leadership (Mitchell & Lambert, 2015). However, teachers can realise this agency and now in a time of environmental crisis and social upheaval, there is a moment that educational changes become possible. More specifically current needs which if addressed, could we suggest, increase teachers’ agency in developing a progressive or ‘future 3’ curriculum as it lives in classrooms are: 1. models of recontextualisation more relevant for geography; 2. more help and ways forward for teachers to navigate pressures, to achieve the potential of a re-imagined school geography; 3. greater criticality because sometimes popular ideas such as ‘powerful knowledge’ are somewhat taken for granted; 4. more representation of Primary geography in the literature on recontextualisation and recognition of Primary geography in debates around knowledge and curriculum; 5. a more networked approach to open up more opportunities for collaboration across the fields of production between universities, schools and others in the community interested and involved in geography education; 6. geography teachers more aware of how school geography can be constructed in appropriate ways conceptually and pedagogically for school-aged students; 7. the acknowledgement of, and realisation that, whilst university and school relations regarding knowledge are important, strong differences between geography as a discipline and as a school subject remain; 8. further research on recontextualising geography education because this area remains considerably under-represented in the literature.

12 Conclusion

189

12.2.3  How Can This Happen? Finally, we propose what is needed in order to bring these changes about. We see teacher development as the key. Within this broad area, we see four catalysts for change: 1. further development of an Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and a extending an ITE infrastructure that is based on principles that give teachers a strong understanding of school geography redefined and re-imagined as conceptual, progressive and ‘to be made’ by the teacher, the student and the discipline; 2. continuing Teacher Education which returns to these points for ITE to help to further embed a school culture of progressive, discipline-informed curriculum leadership for geography and for all school subjects; 3. funded research particularly involving teacher researchers but also involving geographers in the academy on how geography in education is recontextualised; 4. the use of (and influence over) control levers to support this, such as examination, inspection focuses, school funding arrangements, ITE and throughout career teacher education funding/direction. By providing these new opportunities for focusing on recontextualising geography in education, as an geography education community we can continue to revisit and, where necessary (as is now the case) to re-define and re-imagine our school subject to realise its potential for young people in the times in which they live. Geography is not a static subject and is constantly evolving. The geography taught in schools does not simply flow from the academic discipline in some distilled form, it is shaped by many different parties, not least the teachers working with their students and in this way. Living in the Anthropocene, the stakes are high, but we agree with Bonnett’s (2008) framing of Geography as constantly evolving but with an enduring purpose for human survival and understanding. This surely makes the challenging work of recontextualising geography worth it.

References Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique (Vol. 5). Rowman & Littlefield. Bonnett, A. (2008). What is geography? SAGE. Firth, R. (2017). Recontextualising geography as a school subject. In M.  Jones & D.  Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.). Kitson, A. (2020). Teachers as recontextualization agents: a study of expert teachers’ knowledge and their role in the recontextualization process across different subjects (Doctoral dissertation). UCL (University College London). Lambert, D. (2019). On the knotty question of ‘Recontextualising’ geography. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 28(4), 257–261.

190

M. Fargher et al.

Mitchell, D., & Lambert, D. (2015). Subject knowledge and teacher preparation in English secondary schools: The case of geography. Teacher Development, 19(3), 365–380. Spielman, A. (2018). Speech reported 10.10.18. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/ news/education/education-news/ofsted-exam-results-school-inspections-watchdog-amandaspielman-curriculum-a8578761.html. Vernon, E. (2016). The structure of knowledge; does theory matter? Geography, 101(2), 100–104.