Teaching Primary Geography: Setting the Foundation (Key Challenges in Geography) [1st ed. 2022] 9783030999698, 9783030999704, 3030999696

Citation preview

Key Challenges in Geography EUROGEO Book Series

Gillian Kidman Daniela Schmeinck   Editors

Teaching Primary Geography Setting the Foundation

Key Challenges in Geography EUROGEO Book Series Series Editors Kostis C. Koutsopoulos, European Association of Geographers, National Technical University of Athens, Pikermi, Greece Rafael de Miguel González, University of Zaragoza & EUROGEO, Zaragoza, Spain Daniela Schmeinck, Institut Didaktik des Sachunterrichts, University of Cologne, Köln, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany

This book series addresses relevant topics in the wide field of geography, which connects the physical, human and technological sciences to enhance teaching, research, and decision making. Geography provides answers to how aspects of these sciences are interconnected and are forming spatial patterns and processes that have impact on global, regional and local issues and thus affect present and future generations. Moreover, by dealing with places, people and cultures, Geography explores international issues ranging from physical, urban and rural environments and their evolution, to climate, pollution, development and political economy. Key Challenges in Geography is an initiative of the European Association of Geographers (EUROGEO), an organization dealing with examining geographical issues from a European perspective, representing European Geographers working in different professional activities and at all levels of education. EUROGEO's goal and the core part of its statutory activities is to make European Geography a worldwide reference and standard. The book series serves as a platform for members of EUROGEO as well as affiliated National Geographical Associations in Europe, but is equally open to contributions from non-members. The book series addresses topics of contemporary relevance in the wide field of geography. It has a global scope and includes contributions from a wide range of theoretical and applied geographical disciplines. Key Challenges in Geography aims to: • present collections of chapters on topics that reflect the significance of Geography as a discipline; • provide disciplinary and interdisciplinary titles related to geographical, environmental, cultural, economic, political, urban and technological research with a European dimension, but not exclusive; • deliver thought-provoking contributions related to cross-disciplinary approaches and interconnected works that explore the complex interactions among geography, technology, politics, environment and human conditions; • publish volumes tackling urgent topics to geographers and policy makers alike; • publish comprehensive monographs, edited volumes and textbooks refereed by European and worldwide experts specialized in the subjects and themes of the books; • provide a forum for geographers worldwide to communicate on all aspects of research and applications of geography, with a European dimension, but not exclusive. All books/chapters will undergo a blind review process with a minimum of two reviewers. An author/editor questionnaire, instructions for authors and a book proposal form can be obtained by contacting the Publisher.

Gillian Kidman  •  Daniela Schmeinck Editors

Teaching Primary Geography Setting the Foundation

Editors Gillian Kidman Faculty of Education Monash University Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Daniela Schmeinck University of Cologne Cologne, Germany

ISSN 2522-8420     ISSN 2522-8439 (electronic) Key Challenges in Geography ISBN 978-3-030-99969-8    ISBN 978-3-030-99970-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved 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

Preface

This book brings together authors with expertise in geography education as taught and researched in primary schools. The original intention was to present chapters by authors whose research expertise was purely in the primary school; however, such authors are indeed rare. In the end, the final line-up of chapters and authors was a result of various calls for contributions from the research community. The authors are, therefore, by necessity, from primary and secondary geography teaching backgrounds. We thank them for their belief in our efforts to produce a book like no other  – a book pertaining to research into the teaching and learning of primary school geography education. The book is titled Teaching Primary Geography: Setting the Foundation. The notion behind setting the foundation goes beyond the provision of foundation studies for secondary school geography education, or even tertiary studies. We show that the integrated identity of geography is ideal for developing tomorrow’s citizens so they can be leaders in a just world – thus geography is foundational learning for our sustainable future. We make a call for a mandated geography education for all children as we recognise that a geographical education is a key to addressing the UNESCO Sustainability Development Goals. Globally, we are in a crisis situation. Not only is the COVID-19 Pandemic event a crisis, but the following six challenges also indicate global crises: • • • • • •

Sustainability Migration Refugees and asylum seekers Global inequalities Population Climate Change

It is through education, starting in primary school and from the geography curricula of each country, that we can hope to address challenges. This is perhaps a bold call given that geography is not seen as a priority subject in most countries. It has a confused identity further complicating its acceptance among policy officials. Given the current global pandemic and economic hardship faced globally, we need to v

vi

Preface

reconsider the current prioritisations across schools and recognise the educational potential and necessity of geography. We are experiencing unprecedented changes to our global physical, social, political and economic environments. We believe a geographical education is essential to empower our children and youth with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to engage these uncertain and complex issues and to take us forward. To this end, we offer this book to assist the geography community to gain a better understanding of primary school geography. The key goal of the book is to provide thought-provoking material on the teaching of geography. The research discussed in the book is expected to provide valuable insights relating to secondary geography as well as primary geography, which is its main focus. The issues and ideas presented in each chapter are also central to teaching geography in secondary schools – especially since many secondary school students may not have studied geography in primary school. The first chapter seeks to capture the essence but vulnerable nature of the geographical education landscape. Geography is presented as a blending of the physical sciences, social sciences and humanities. It develops values and attitudes and should be taught weekly so that the child learns to understand their world as it occurs around them. The chapter highlights a model where the student is central to a geographical education that has attitudinal change as a central component, enabling the student to become an agent of change. The chapter also presents the necessary development of Advanced GeoSkills that blend key twenty-first-century skills and geography’s discipline-specific investigative tools and thinking through inquiry practices to develop the leaders of tomorrow. In seeking to achieve a unified contribution to the literature, the book is divided into two main parts that address the theoretical aspects of teaching and learning geography in primary school. Following chapter “Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings”, Part I presents five chapters that cover the broad issues of interconnections and understanding. Part II presents the remaining five chapters that focus on the narrower areas of experiencing and visualising geography. Chapter “Setting the Foundation  – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography” concludes the book with a brief synthesis of the previous 10 chapters. The chapter concludes with a Framework for Primary Geography Education, which highlights the essential present and future learnings, indicating three critical goals: dispositions, knowledge and responsibility. Melbourne, VIC, Australia Cologne, Germany

Gillian Kidman Daniela Schmeinck

Contents

 Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings ������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Gillian Kidman and Daniela Schmeinck Part I  Interconnections and Understandings  The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools ��������������������������������������������������������������������   15 Daniela Schmeinck and Gillian Kidman  Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future����������������������������������������������   29 Andy Wi  Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography ����������������������������������������������   45 Niranjan Casinader  Conceptual Change and Primary Geography����������������������������������������������   61 Moritz Harder  Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions������������   81 Gillian Kidman Part II Experiencing and Visualising  Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography������������������������������   95 Gillian Kidman and Deya Chakraborty  Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia������������������������������������������������  113 Catherine Lang and Carolyn Quon  Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography ������������������������������������������������������  133 Sarah Witham Bednarz, Injeong Jo, and Euikyung Shin

vii

viii

Contents

 The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  145 Daniela Schmeinck  Setting the Foundation – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography������������������������������������������������������������  163 Daniela Schmeinck and Gillian Kidman Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  171

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings Gillian Kidman and Daniela Schmeinck

Abstract  This chapter presents Geography as a blending of the Physical Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities. Through an analysis of the attempts to define Geography in primary school settings, we determine that Geography is about developing values and attitudes and should be taught weekly so that the child learns to understand their world as it occurs around them. The two International Charters on Geographical Education (from 1992 and then 2016) are explored in terms of how Geography is defined, and then more recently, in terms of an action plan for geographical education. Geography education is seen as a transformative subject where attitudinal shifts of being and growing into an agent of change are advocated. The chapter highlights a model where the student is central to a geographical education that promotes attitudinal change where the student becomes an agent of change. The chapter also presents the necessary development of Advanced GeoSkills that blend key 21st Century skills and Geography’s discipline-specific investigative tools and thinking through inquiry practices to develop the leaders of tomorrow. Keywords  Primary school geography · Agents of change · 21st Century skills · Advanced GeoSkills

What Is Geography? Description according to time is History, that according to space is Geography … History differs from Geography in the consideration of time and area. The former is a report of phenomena that follow one another and has reference to time. The latter is a report of phenomena that follow one another in space. History is a narrative, geography is a description … Geography and History fill up the entire circumference of our perceptions: Geography that of space, History that of time (Hartshorne 1939 on Kant). G. Kidman (*) Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] D. Schmeinck Institute of Primary Science and Social Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_1

1

G. Kidman and D. Schmeinck

2

Within geography education and academic geography, the quest for a definition of Geography as a discipline, so its disciplinary identity, has been continuous for over a century. Traditionally, we have seen Geography contest its identity as a discipline in the tertiary and school contexts. This quest for identity arises from Geography’s unique quality of combining the natural sciences (physics, biology and geology), the social sciences (which include human society and social relations, social behavioural explanations) and the humanities (which consists of the Arts, Religion, Philosophy, language and Music). Köck (1992) examined whether and to what extent Geography can be considered an essential school subject. Köck explained that space is elementary and universal, hence a primary or critical category of the earth itself – as is life on earth. By teaching this spatial knowledge and the associated spatial behaviours, Geography can contribute to developing vital spatial behaviour competencies. Traditionally, Geography is considered to be a geospatial centering subject. Nevertheless, it can also be referred to as a geo-scientific centering subject since it also considers liferelevant earth issues, for which there are no separate school subjects. Finally, Köck described how Geography assists other school subjects in understanding their problems. In doing so, geography becomes a central service subject. This complex relationship with other disciplines has resulted in Geography being repeatedly placed within an ‘integrated studies’ category without recognising its precise definition and individuality. We depict this relationship in Fig. 1. We highlight the positioning of Primary Geography  – the intersection of the three disciplines. Primary Geography has the strength to draw upon each discipline in varying degrees depending upon the topic and desired learning outcomes  – thus giving geography the role of synthesis. Goodson (1993) outlined that Geography made its debut as a school subject as an ingredient of integrated courses, combined with History and sometimes the sciences, and physics in particular. It was, however, a low-status ingredient until it found its footing as a separate subject, in its own right, in the early years of the twentieth century. In the epigraph to this chapter, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) described the uniqueness of geographic data by suggesting that geographic knowledge can be approached as a chorological relationship (the geographic, spatial approach) or in a chronological sequence (the historical approach). To this, we add Gregg and Fig. 1 Disciplinary strengths of Primary Geography

Physical Sciences

Social Sciences

‘Integrated Studies’ Cross-curricula approach of Primary Geography

Humanies

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings

3

Leinhardt’s (1993) notion of the substantive approach of a cohesive body of facts (as with the sciences). Through the formal study of Geography in both Primary and Secondary schools, students learn to use analytical tools to recognise and apply spatial relationships in the world around them, thus developing a sense of causal relations between geographical phenomena as they study the spatial distribution of organisms (biogeography) through chorological relationships. Geography endeavours to achieve an integrated understanding of its content by drawing on knowledge from the sciences, the social sciences and the humanities. “This assists cross-­ disciplinary learning and helps students recognise the connections between geography and more specialised subjects they may be studying” (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) 2011, p. 5). Beginning in primary school, students can expect, from their geographical learnings, to start to develop both a geographic perspective (being able to describe, explain, and predict phenomena and processes in terms of distribution, context, and scale) and geographic reasoning (using their geographical perspective as a tool for organising knowledge in other disciplines such as history, geology, or anthropology to produce knowledge about the spatial aspects of some other discipline). This learning is unavailable from any other discipline or approach to knowledge (Gregg and Leinhardt 1993). A geographic perspective and geographic reasoning combine as key components of a student’s geographical literacy. Before we explore primary geography classroom experiences and understandings, we first define Geography and attempt to distinguish it from the other disciplines. We have selected a definition from the Institute of Australian Geographers (IAG 2020). Although lengthy, this definition, like most others, describes geography as the study of place, space and the environment. Still, unlike most others, it also considers the actions of a geographer in terms of questioning and motivations: Geography is the study of place, space and the environment. Geographers investigate the character of places, the distribution of phenomena across space, biophysical processes and features, and dynamic relationships between humans and environments. Geographers ask questions about why these phenomena and relationships are like they are and how they could be; how societies and environments are connected to one another; how and why they change; and how and why their characteristics vary across time and space at different scales. Geography answers questions spanning the local to the global, in the past, present and future. Geography is fundamentally interdisciplinary. It is one of the few disciplines that encompass very different ways of knowing, from the natural and social sciences and the humanities. Geographers are therefore uniquely equipped to understand and address critical problems facing the world. Geographers are motivated by issues such as social and environmental justice, and the efficient, equitable and sustainable use of resources.

This definition implies curiosity about places and a sense of exploration through the emphasis of questioning. This is particularly important for students in primary schools, where we want to develop a sense of wonder about the world’s diversity and beauty. In the primary school setting, both the teachers and the students are encouraged to ask geographical questions similar to those in the above definition. Kidman (2022), in chapter “Geographical Question Typologies: Student-­Generated Questions” of this volume, provides an interesting analysis of student-generated

4

G. Kidman and D. Schmeinck

questions from Australian primary school classrooms. However, we must stress that the geographical focus on questioning is not restricted to Australian settings, and certainly not restricted to in-class experiences. Indeed, much of the planning of exemplary lessons is based on questions posed by the teacher and posed in society. Most of the international educational community follow Storm’s “five key questions, used by teachers to provide structure, sequence, and stimulus” (Catling et al. 2013, p. 86) in the primary classroom: • • • • •

What is the place like? Why is this place as it is? How is this place connected to other places? How is this place changing? And How would it feel to live in this place? (Storm 1989, p. 4)

Britz and Schmeinck (2014) argue that through the emphasis of questioning, young children in primary school have the opportunity to develop an emotional relationship and understanding towards new information, and thus an ability to work with new issues and knowledge in a meaningful and context-sensitive manner. Therefore, setting a foundation for global citizenship and environmental responsibility is essential as such attitudes pave the way for an appreciation of the biophysical and built environments. As Chawla (2009) indicates, building such attitudes from a young age can lead to adult defenders of the natural world. Maude (2010) describes a geographical empathy that is the foundation of global citizenship  – which we consider an essential outcome of a geographical education that questions social and environmental justice issues around people and places. Students need to develop the ability to analyse and clarify their values and understand the values of others. Above, in defining geography as a discipline, we outlined several questions geographers tend to ask and very similar questions that have guided the teaching of geography in a primary school classroom for many decades. We need a geography education, starting in primary school and continuing into secondary school, developing such questioning abilities. We need students to be able to question such issues as: • • • • • •

sustainability, migration, refugees and asylum seekers, global inequalities, population, and climate change.

In primary school, we need to help students question our current actions and learn from our past mistakes, be critically aware of the issues facing their world in the present and the future, and be prepared to take a stance for what they believe. Yesterday, Geography might have been about reading maps, reciting the names of rivers and capital cities, and possibly reproducing ‘imperialist’ ideologies. Today, however, Geography education has been reconsidered; it is now about critical thinking and the development of the necessary knowledge and understanding, skills,

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings

5

attitudes and values described in the original 1992 charter. It achieves these three objectives through a multi-perspective, systematic and problem-solving approach. We advocate that primary school geography needs to be a mandated subject that aims to develop an engaged outward disposition, an involved outlook, a desire not merely to observe the world but to change it for the better. To be considered informed, responsible and active citizens, students should develop informed attitudes and values related to sustainability in a just society. These attributes can be developed through geographical learnings that investigate the local, national and global scale. Thus, we consider a geographical education in primary schools to be an essential component of weekly learning(for real-world currency) as it: • uses analytical tools to explore spatial relationships thus developing a sense of causality • integrates the sciences, the social sciences and the humanities in terms of place, space and the environment • develops a geographic perspective where phenomena and processes are understood in terms of distribution, context, and scale) • develops geographic reasoning to produce knowledge about the spatial aspects of other disciplines • promotes empathy, questioning one’s actions, and motivates one to do better. Throughout the chapters in this volume, these justifications are explored from both the research literature and from empirical evidence. Thus, the importance of geographical learnings, beginning in the Primary School setting, is evident. To reflect this importance, curriculum designers have been guided by two charters that outline the desired objectives of geographical education, and more recently, an action plan to achieve these objectives.

Charter Documents Since 1992, Geography curricula in Primary and Secondary schools have been guided by The International Charter on Geographical Education (International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE)), a manifesto of what geography could achieve in education and how it could be achieved. The Charter was written with geography as its disciplinary context but with direct reference to the UN and UNESCO documents concerned with international understanding. The Charter was prepared by an international group of geographical education experts. Over four years, it was analysed, deconstructed, reconstructed and massaged until it was decided that its message regarding the importance of geography education for all students in all grades was ready for publication. Similar to the definition of Geography we cite above from the IAG, the Charter outlines the questions geographers ask and summarises the central concepts of

6

G. Kidman and D. Schmeinck

geographical studies, emphasising the individuals being educated. In particular, the Charter outlines three objectives that when studying geography, students should: • develop knowledge and understanding, • skills, and • attitudes and values. The Charter advocates that the preferred educational philosophy should determine if a regional or thematic approach will be used to deliver these three objectives. In teaching children, a questioning or inquiry approach is promoted to develop the geographical skills of seeking solutions to current and future problems. Like all things, geography education has changed over time, and so did the Charter. A four-­ year “review was undertaken to keep geography education in tune with major changes that have occurred in the discipline, in the ways that access to geographic information and materials has changed, and with the opportunities that the twenty-­ first century presents for the study of geography” (Stoltman et al. 2017, p. 1). In 2016 a new charter was presented “as an action plan” (International Geographic Union – Commission on Geographical Education 2016, p. 20). The 1992 and 2016 Charters are the international guidelines for establishing, sustaining, and institutionalising geography education to the world’s students and teachers in primary and secondary schools. Countries draw upon the Charter documents and their own and other policy documents to create their geographical education goals as illustrated from Germany: The main goals of geography lessons are … to provide insights into the connections between natural conditions and social activities in different parts of the world, and to teach an associated spatially-oriented competence that can be applied. These main goals are in accordance with the International Geographical Union’s “International Charter of Geographical Education”, the “Curriculum 2000+” of the German Geographical Society as well as the “Basic Curriculum” of the Association of German School Geographers (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geographie (DGfG) 2014, p. 6).

Building an Attitude of Being an Agent of Change As described above, the 2016 International Charter on Geographical Education advocates for classroom teaching that builds on the student’s own experiences, enabling them to formulate questions, develop their intellectual skills, and respond to issues they experience. This has the potential to be quite transformative, as such a contemporary geographical education would introduce students to key 21st Century skills and Geography’s specific investigative tools and thinking, especially concerning and through inquiry practices and fieldwork. Throughout a child’s schooling, but especially starting in the primary years, there is a need for thinking and learning and potential opportunities for students to develop identities that require them to enact moral responsibility and become agents of change. The 2016 Charter acknowledges the importance of recognising how young people can

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings

7

participate as citizens in everyday community ‘spaces’ through inquiry, action and the community learning of issues, with a moral implication embedded in geographic contexts. To enable this, the primary aged child requires enjoyable environmental experiences, especially in the company of their peers or families, if they are to grow up to be adult defenders of the natural world (Chawla 2009). The concept of ‘place’ advocated in Geography curricula is ideal for facilitating the child’s development of becoming an agent of change as Winograd (2016) points out: “Students study an aspect of their local social and ecological setting … engage in analysis of problems which may reveal some injustice … and, then, take actions to address those problems” (p. 6). The child is encouraged to make a personal commitment to resolving an issue through a shared responsibility as a citizen. There is ample research and anecdotal evidence that supports the importance of students undertaking learning that impacts beyond the school gates. The German educational standards for Geography inform us that “the influence of school lessons is limited and that factors external to the school, especially the students’ parents and friends, play a large role. Students should not be manipulated in school or forced to take action but should decide to take action after serious thought and for good reasons” (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geographie (DGfG) 2014, p. 24). This highlights that the competence area of “Action” for German students is highly valued but needs to be treated with care. The DGfG outlines that a responsible action education requires: • the teaching of action-relevant knowledge (e.g., knowledge of potential solutions, spatial problems, environmentally friendly measures) (A1), • is taught and when the students are also motivated/interested (A2), • developing a willingness to take appropriate action (A3), and • encouraging students to think about the consequences of action planned or carried out and possible alternatives (A4). Another example of students taking action and becoming agents of change is where UNESCO engaged young people in participatory action research to evaluate and improve their local environments and to help address the issues affecting urban children and youth (Alidou and Glanz 2015). Projects that enable students to become agents of change strengthen connections between classroom developed knowledge and understandings and actions by providing the transdisciplinary knowledge-based input required to tackle personally relevant local challenges. The geographical learnings from the classroom can be both a distinctive form of knowledge and a specific approach to mobilising and applying the knowledge. Thus, geographical understandings can enable connections between morals, values, imagination and creativity, which are the essence of the Humanities, just as much as are the theoretical and empirical constructs of geography. Engaging students in change activities empowers them to develop geographic knowledge through data interpretation and the analysis of conflicting evidence. Powerful knowledge was introduced to the geography education community several years ago to represent knowledge that is the resultant of thinking beyond the limits of one’s own experience: “Knowledge is ‘powerful’ if it predicts, if it explains,

8

G. Kidman and D. Schmeinck

if it enables you to envisage alternatives” (Young 2014, p. 74). This powerful knowledge enables students of all ages to think about alternatives and how to enact some of these alternatives, to learn new ways of thinking about current affairs, and participate in local, national or global matters of significance. Powerful knowledge is specialist, age-appropriate knowledge that is usually only taught in schools through sharing ideas and peer discussions. Therefore, powerful knowledge contributes to the student attitude of being an agent of change. Argumentation (i.e. a process of making and justifying claims) and in-class interaction during such activities enables even the primary-aged student to evaluate claims, to assess multiple ethical viewpoints, and then utilise a multidisciplinary lens to consider the social, economic, political, and ethical consequences when generating solutions around problems of personal relevance (Schmeinck 2012). Not all children will reach this ‘ideal’ during their primary school years. The reasons for this are outlined in the latter chapters of this book. However, the general ability of the primary setting to undertake cross-curricula integration of geographical learnings (as described by Schmeinck and Kidman (2022) in chapter “The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools” of this volume) should provide a suitable base for the primary school teacher to develop an agent of change attitude in children. We represent this Student as an Agent of Change attitudinal goal for Primary Geography in Fig. 2. We can see that a geographical learnings curriculum is a critical factor in developing the agent of change attitudinal goal. In primary school, this is likely to be an integrated curriculum with the sciences and humanities and is usually identified as a form of Social Studies. This is explored more fully in Schmeinck and Kidman (2022). In addition to a strong geographical learnings curriculum, the knowledge and understandings need to follow the powerful knowledge principle, outlined briefly above and again in later chapters of this volume, to engage the students.

Powerful Knowledge

STUDENT

Advanced GeoSkills

Student as Agents of Change

Geographical Learnings Curriculum

Inquir Inquiry-based Pracces Prac

Fig. 2  Student as an agent of change attitudinal goal. (Modified from Kidman 2017)

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings

9

The integrated curriculum and the powerful knowledge present the ‘what’ of primary geography and need to be accompanied by the ‘how’ of primary geography teaching and learning. As described by Kidman and Chakraborty (2022) (see chapter “Inquiry-­Based Practices in Primary School Geography” of this volume), the ‘how’ must involve the combination of inquiry-based practices and skills, as advocated by the Charter (International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE)). In our quest to develop the agent of change attitude in primary school students, we separate the inquiry and skills. However, skills are often considered the essence of inquiry (Kidman and Casinader 2017). As Kidman and Chakraborty (2022) outline, inquiry-based teaching and learning are processes and not skills. Kidman (2017) described what she identified as Advanced GeoSkills – geographical skills (for example, topographic profile) that complement generic educational skills (for example, graphing) and are accompanied by the development of 21st Century skills and specific mindsets. Kidman’s Advanced GeoSkills model (see Fig.  3) is composed of these four core elements. The 21st Century skills, mindsets, generic skills and geographic discipline-specific skills identified in the Advanced GeoSkills model are indicative only. There are numerous versions of these so-called “soft skills” and mindsets, and academic skills, but all are based on the notion of effective learning, higher-order thinking skills, and learning dispositions. Ideally, the generic skills develop alongside the 21st Century skills and mindsets through the wider curriculum form a solid foundation upon which to develop the geographic discipline-specific skills. The geographic discipline-specific skills are skills unlikely to be taught anywhere else in the curriculum but are used across society. For example, the many types of maps developed by geographers (isoline, isopleth, choropleth) but then used by other professions to communicate ideas for general consumption.

Fig. 3  Advanced GeoSkills. (Modified from Kidman 2017)

10

G. Kidman and D. Schmeinck

Conclusion This chapter has explored the nature of geography education in the primary school setting. The lack of a disciplinary identity of geography in the primary school is alluded to and interpreted as a blending of the Physical Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities. As such, Geography brings strength to the primary classroom in terms of integrative perspectives, reasoning and an empowering notion of taking action. Geography is about developing values and attitudes and should be taught weekly so that the child learns to understand their world as it occurs around them. The two International Charters on Geographical Education (from 1992 and then 2016) call for educational opportunities that enable the child to understand their world as it occurs around them. These opportunities should build on the child’s own experiences, allowing them to formulate questions, develop their intellectual skills, and respond to issues they experience. This notion of ‘responding’ is essential for contemporary and transformative education resulting in an attitudinal shift of the child being and growing into an agent of change. Through introducing children to key 21st Century skills and Geography’s discipline-specific investigative tools (Advanced GeoSkills) and thinking, concerning and through inquiry practices and fieldwork, they can grow to be the leaders of tomorrow that are needed globally uniquely equipped to understand and address critical problems being encountered the world.

References Alidou H, Glanz C (eds) (2015) Action research to improve youth and adult literacy: empowering learners in a multilingual world. Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) and UNESCO Multi-­ sectoral Regional Office. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2011) Shape of the Australian curriculum: geography. Author, Sydney Britz O, Schmeinck D (2014) Wir wechseln die Perspektive. Grundschulkinder lernen ferne Räume kennen. Grundschulmagazin 2:13–18 Catling S, Willy T, Butler J (2013) Teaching primary geography for Australian schools. Hawker Brownlow Education, Moorabbin Chawla L (2009) Participation as capacity-building for active citizenship. Les Ateliers de l’ Ethique, Spring issue Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geographie (DGfG) (ed) (2014) Educational standards in geography for the intermediate school certificate, 3rd edn. Selbstverlag Deutsche Gesellschaft für Geographie, Bonn Goodson I (1993) School subject and curriculum change: studies in the social history of curriculum. The Falmer Press, London Gregg M, Leinhardt G (1993) Geography in history: what is the where? J Geogr 92(2):56–63 Hartshorne R (1939) The nature of geography. Association of American Geographers, Lancaster Institute of Australian Geographers (IAG) (2020) What is geography? Nature and extent of geography. IAG. https://www.iag.org.au/what-­is-­geography-­. Accessed 21 Jan 2020

Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings

11

International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE) (1992) International charter on geographical education. IGU-CGE, Freiburg International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE) (2016) The 2016 international charter on geography education. IGU-CGE, Beijing Kidman G (2022) Geographical question typologies: student-generated questions. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 81–92 Kidman G, Chakraborty D (2022) Inquiry-based practices in primary school geography. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 95–111 Kidman G (2017) Restorative progress and sustainability: children as change agents – focussing on the opportunities and not on the problems. Keynote address. Southeast Asia Geography Association (SEAGA) International Conference Depok City, Jakarta, Indonesia Kidman G, Casinader N (2017) Inquiry-based teaching and learning across disciplines: Comparative theory and practice in schools. Palgrave Macmillan Köck H (1992) Der Geographieunterricht  - ein Schlüsselfach. Geographische Rundschau 44:183–195 Maude A (2010) What does geography contribute to the education of young Australians? Geogr Educ 23:14–22 Schmeinck D (2012) Wir bauen unsere Stadt der Zukunft - Argumentieren in der Grundschule. Diercke. Kommunikation und Argumentation. Westermann, Braunschweig, pp 50–55 Schmeinck D, Kidman G (2022) The integrated nature of geography education in German and Australian primary schools. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 15–27 Stoltman J, Lidstone J, Kidman G (2017) The 2016 international charter on geographical education. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 26(1):1–2 Storm M (1989) The five basic questions for primary geography. Prim Geogr 2:4–5 Winograd K (2016) Education in times of environmental crises: teaching children to be agents of change. Routledge, New York Young M (2014) Powerful knowledge as a curriculum principle. In Young M, Lambert D, Roberts C, Roberts M (eds) Knowledge and the future school: curriculum and social justice (pp. 65–88). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Part I

Interconnections and Understandings

In Part I of this book, each of the five chapters provides a theoretical and empirical discussion of building interconnections and understandings in Geography. We see interconnections as being how geographical content is organised and connected. The consequence of these connections is our ability to see and interpret the relationships between aspects of geographical knowledge and construct explanatory frameworks to illustrate these relationships. Chapter “The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools” uses a comparative approach (between Germany’s Sachunterricht subject and Australia’s National Curriculum) to explore integrated geographical education. The chapter outlines that in an increasingly globalised world dominated by complex connections and tasks, learning and teaching needs to prepare children for the future. Children need to gain fundamental insights into complex contemporary topics such as mobility, sustainability and climate change. The teacher must use examples familiar to the child to enable the child to understand the complexity and the mutual interdependence of environment, society and economy. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the necessity of the teacher to be competently prepared to plan and deliver lessons that of an integrative, multi-­ perspective approach. Chapter “Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future” uses a review of the literature on primary school geography to reveal historical trends of primary school geography educational research. An interesting finding is that primary school geography is an under-researched area as is the idea of sustainability. The journal International Research in Geography and Environmental Education is the leading publishing outlet for primary geography education research. Chapter “Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography” enlightens the reader about the teaching of cultural understanding that meets the needs of our more globally oriented society. Australia, Singapore, and Finland are compared via an overview of the school curriculum frameworks to illustrate how none of these countries considers Geography as a vehicle for teaching cultural understanding. Chapter “Conceptual Change and Primary Geography” summarises conceptual change theories and implications for a didactical perspective. A brief review of the literature on research concepts on geography-related topics and conceptual change is presented. The

14

I  Interconnections and Understandings

chapter ends with insight from an empirical study of primary children's conceptions about rivers. Chapter “Geographical Question Typologies: Student-­ Generated Questions” concludes Part I with an in-depth discussion of question typologies of student-generated questions. Questions uttered by children in Year 2 and Year 6 revealed eight typologies that are compared in the chapter. A relationship was found to exist between questioning and intellectual sophistication.

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools Daniela Schmeinck and Gillian Kidman

Abstract  This chapter explores the teaching of primary school geography by contrasting the multi-perspective Sachunterricht subject from Germany and the single discipline subject of Geography in the Australian Curriculum: HASS. Both Germany and Australia adopt the notion of integrated geographical education. Learning and teaching prepare the children for their actual and future lives in an increasingly globalised world dominated by complex connections and tasks. Children need to gain fundamental insights into complex contemporary topics such as mobility, sustainability and climate change. The teacher must select examples familiar to the child to enable the child to understand the complexity and the mutual interdependence of environment, society and economy. Appropriate connections with the relevant subject disciplines are therefore necessary. At the same time, good teaching and learning must allow children the most significant possible link to their general and individual living experiences. Keywords  Sachunterricht · Geography · Primary school · Perspectives · Integration

Introduction to Geography in the Primary Curriculum As outlined in chapter “Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings” and across all chapters in this book, primary school Geography is primarily seen as an interdisciplinary subject. It relies on the teacher promoting the study of geographical concepts from multiple perspectives. The term interdisciplinary means the inclusion of multiple perspectives. Integrating D. Schmeinck (*) Institute of Primary Science and Social Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: [email protected] G. Kidman Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_2

15

16

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

multiple perspectives is an intellectual activity that requires the consideration of a concept from alternative viewpoints so that a comprehensive understanding of the concept is possible. This enables finding unique solutions to problems that are generally impossible without considering multiple perspectives. In this chapter, we explore the integration of multiple perspectives in primary school Geography classrooms. We do this from both the German and Australian perspectives. We aim to explore the complex educational issues that emerge when teaching geographical concepts that promote the integration of multiple perspectives. Together we consider primary Geography education from different viewpoints to determine a richer understanding of what is required of the teacher. We seek to find common ground that will allow us to innovate with our teaching at the intersection of ideas and move Geography teacher education toward a brighter future. We begin the chapter with a consideration of the need for integration, followed by an overview of Germany and Australia’s primary school geography curricula. Within each overview, we highlight teacher education issues that require addressing if the teaching of Geography in the primary school is to meet the policy intentions.

Key Problems of Society – The Need for Primary Geography As early as 1992, Klafki reflected upon contemporary primary school education and the mandate of primary school science and social science (in German, Sachunterricht). He highlighted six critical problems of society: • • • • •

the question of war and peace; the environmental question/the ecological question; the rapid growth of the world population; the socially produced inequality; the threats and opportunities of the new technical control, information and communication media; • the subjectiveness of the individual and the phenomenon of the me-you relationship against the background of the tension between individual aspirations for happiness, interpersonal responsibility and the recognition of the other (Klafki 1992). For Klafki, the problems of society should be seen as target perspectives for the whole of society, and not just for primary school education. Nevertheless, he stressed educating students about these societal problems needs to begin with the primary school student. He emphasised that the primary curriculum’s Sachunterricht (General Studies) lessons play a particularly important role because of these societal problems. Using suitably chosen examples, an essential basis for a successful future can and, indeed, should be established. Klafki’s notion of engaging young children with the critical problems of society is still current today. Relating Sachunterricht lessons to real-life experiences were mirrored by Catling et  al.

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

17

(2013) where they identified high-quality primary school Geography teaching to be (a) purposeful where students see its relevance and value; (b) problem-oriented where students pose solutions; (c) promoting inquiry-based practices that incorporate the idea of evidence; (d) of a cooperative nature where students learn with and through each other, and (e) an engagement with the world using fieldwork to seek information, insight and understanding. Klafki’s problems of society are resonated in the Catling et  al. characteristics. However, Catling et  al. reinforce the ideas through a teaching lens. The problems of society described by Klafki cannot be explained or solved from a one-dimensional, subject-specific view. Nor can they be taught through traditional didactics, as implied by Catling et  al. above. The complexity of the underlying issues requires a multiple-perspective consideration and contemporary pedagogies. For instance, the question of war and peace is a question of natural resources, cultural norms, and economic interests. It is not only a politically orientated question. Issues about the environment and sustainable development are not easily solved, especially without a multi-perspective consideration and appropriate pedagogies that consider the laws of nature and technical opportunity in addition to political and economic interests, and importantly, the learner and the teacher.

Considering Integration in Education In Australia, we often hear about the overcrowded curriculum. A recent review of the school curriculum from Kindergarten to Year 12 (Masters 2020) found that teachers claimed to be struggling to teach the sheer volume of mandatory content, particularly in the primary years. Duplication of subjects was considered as unnecessarily adding to the volume. For example, there is an overlap between the geography and science curriculum relating to the natural environment for 9-year-old students. An overcrowded curriculum does not enable in-depth teaching or learning. A solution for addressing this overcrowding problem is integrating elements of the curriculum  – viewing the content from multiple perspectives  – as seen in Sachunterricht lessons. However, integration should not be seen as a time-saver. Integrating curriculum areas should not reduce the scope of student learning or the time to be spent teaching key concepts. Instead of viewing curriculum integration as a time-saver, we prefer to view integration as a necessity to addressing the problems of society, described by Klafki above, through Catling et al. (2013) high-quality teaching. We see a parallel between Klafki’s problems of society and the challenges identified in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (UN General Assembly 2015). Humanity has been grappling with the same wicked problems for over a quarter of a century. Box 1 is a listing of the SDGs. We have opted to include the full wording of each goal and not an abridged listing. We want their full integrative and indivisible potential for Geography education to be evident.

18

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

Box 1: United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN General Assembly 2015, p. 14) 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development These 17 goals include 169 targets regarding challenges such as hunger, health and well-being, quality education, affordable and clean energy, and sustainable cities and communities. The aim is that these goals will be achieved by 2030. The 17 SDGs are diverse, yet they are interrelated. Therefore, holistic and interdisciplinary thinking from multiple perspectives is needed. Our children are tomorrows geographers, scientists, engineers, and decision-makers. They require an education that equips them to address the SDGs and new global challenges. Behind these challenges are complex systems of interconnected causes. Therefore, a systems approach to thinking is also needed, which emphasises the interactions between the system’s components and the overall system itself. A geographical education that integrates multiple perspectives is, in some ways, educating for a systems approach to

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

19

geographical thinking. A systems approach will involve the study of the biophysical environment, and it will include the relationships between people and that environment. To develop a holistic and integrated understanding of Klafki’s problems of society and solutions to the SDGs challenges noted above, Geography draws on knowledge from the natural sciences, the social sciences and the humanities. This integration helps students recognise the connections between Geography and more specialised subjects they may be studying (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) 2011). Thus, primary school children need to receive quality integrative education that develops their understanding of societal issues and prepares them for a problem-solving future. This leads us to ask: Are teachers able to teach this level of integration effectively? To return to the aim of this chapter, we will be exploring the teacher education issues relating to the teaching of such a primary Geography curriculum in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia and Australia.1 To do this, we explore a scant literature base. As explained in chapter “Defining Geography in the Primary School: Classroom Experiences and Understandings” of this volume, educational research about Geography is biased towards secondary school and tertiary settings. This impacts the visibility of Geography and perceptions of its relevance in terms of knowledge, skills and cognitive strengthening in the primary school setting. The above section has provided an overview of the geographical imperative of the need for an integrative education that prepares students for a sustainable future. An overview of primary school Sachunterricht in Germany’s North Rhine-Westphalia and primary school Geography in Australia follows.

 achunterricht – General Science and Social Studies S in German Primary Schools In accordance with the Perspective Framework for General Studies in Primary Education (Sachunterricht), published by the Association for General Science and Social Studies at the primary level (Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts (GDSU)), the subject Sachunterricht2 is intended to support a child’s understanding of their natural, cultural, the social and technical environment in an educationally

 Germany has a state-based curriculum, Australia has a national curriculum.  In the Federal Republic of Germany, the 16 States (Länder) are autonomously responsible for all matters of culture and education. Thus, each of the States maintains its own school system. Nevertheless, Primary school generally is for four years (age 6–I0) in a comprehensive school. Only in Berlin and Brandenburg is a 6-year comprehensive school program required. In all states, primary school is committed to an integrated concept of education. Sachunterricht is considered one of the core subjects next to German Language and Mathematics. Although the name of the school subject differs from state to state, as does the curriculum, the textbooks used and the topics taught, a concurring understanding of this subject, and its Didaktik has evolved, establishing it as a university discipline of own standing (GDSU 2003). 1 2

20

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

meaningful way, and thus to enable them to orientate themselves, to contribute to and to act within their environment (GDSU 2013). The subject has the challenging task to ensure the connectivity to both the domain-specific scientific knowledge and the specific ways of thinking, working and acting that dominate the scientifically related disciplines. At the same time, Sachunterricht must build on the pre and out-­ of-­school science and social science knowledge, concepts, competencies, interests and learning needs of the children (Schmeinck and Hennemann 2014). Through mutual and reciprocal consideration of the different tasks and requirements, Sachunterricht can fulfil its high educational expectations. To fulfil both the connectivity towards the subject disciplines of secondary schools and the life experiences and interests of the children, the Perspective Framework for General Studies in Primary Education (see Fig. 1) has been created for use in all German primary schools. The Framework distinguishes five different perspectives within both the thematic areas as well as the ways of thinking, working and acting: • • • • •

the social science perspective (politics – economy – social issues) the natural science perspective (animate and inanimate nature) the geographical perspective (spaces – natural basis – living conditions) the historical perspective (time – change) the technological perspective (technology – work) (GDSU 2013, p. 14)

Nevertheless, the “world of things is not arranged by the scheme of single scientific disciplines” (Luhmann 1985/2004, p. 12). The addition of the different perspectives in separate, perspective-related content will not meet the multi-perspective approach required in the Perspective Framework. The Framework demands an integrative approach and not the presentation of five separated perspectives. In Fig. 1, the five perspectives are presented as central, and linked on the four surrounding dimensions reinforcing to the teachers and curriculum planners, that the perspectives must not be regarded as separate and independent of one another. To fulfil the living worlds of children and thus their complex lifeworld issues, the five perspectives need to be meaningfully interconnected within Sachunterricht’s lessons. Therefore, the constitutive characteristic of Sachunterricht in German primary schools is multi-perspectivity inter-related with a meaningful interconnectedness. The competence model shown in Fig. 1 is based on two dimensions. The first dimension focuses on the content orientated subject areas, questions and concepts and thus on the rather declarative component of competent action. From the geographical perspective, there are subject areas, questions and concepts: • • • •

natural phenomena and natural cycles use, formation, pollution, compromise and protection of space by human being’s diversity and linkage of space; living conditions here and elsewhere development and changes in space (GDSU 2013, p. 45)

The second dimension focuses on the different ways of thinking, working, and acting and thus on the procedural components of Geography:

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

21

Fig. 1  The competence model of the Perspective Framework for General Studies in Primary Education. (GDSU 2013, p. 13; original in the German language)

• Perceiving spaces and living situations in spaces; to raise awareness and reflect on ideas and concepts • Explore and examine spaces and document results • orient themselves in spaces and use orientation tools • Build and develop patterns of order for spatial situations and for nature-human relationships (GDSU 2013, p. 45) The student cannot access content without the knowledge and application of appropriate procedures; vice versa, no methods or techniques can be meaningfully applied without content. Thus, the declarative and procedural dimensions always need to be considered jointly. Both the considerations and demands stated by Klafki (1992) concerning the educational tasks and the multi-perspectivity required by the Perspective Framework for General Studies in Primary Education represent a significant challenge for teaching and learning in primary school. For many primary teachers, the following questions arise: • How can teaching the interconnectedness of science and social sciences be achieved in a meaningful and helpful way? • How does Sachunterricht’s teaching become more than just a stringing together of different content? • How can teachers provide a meaningful and valuable interconnectedness between the different perspectives and thereby help children understand the complexity and the mutual interdependence of the environment, society and economy? To provide Sachunterricht lessons that fit the requirements of the Framework described above, teachers need to carefully choose examples and content for their teaching that relates to the experiences and interests of the children and the learning opportunities of the subject areas. This last point is critical. In a connected

22

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

curriculum, the integrity of the disciplines must be maintained. There needs to be a clear conceptual link among the curricular area content descriptions connected in the planning for both teaching and learning. The present and future significance of the potential content is thereby just as crucial as the exemplary meaning for the subject and the individual learning preconditions of the children.

Geographical Learnings in the Australian Primary School The Australian Curriculum was initiated in 2008 when the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians identified: the central role of education in building a democratic, equitable and just society – a society that is prosperous, cohesive and culturally diverse, and that values Australia’s Indigenous cultures as a key part of the nation’s history, present and future (Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) 2008, p. 4).

This vision requires a humanities education to “support students to relate well to others and foster an understanding of Australian society, citizenship and national values, including through the study of civics and citizenship (MCEETYA 2008, p. 13). Thus, the Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS) are valued as an integral aspect of Australia’s curriculum. HASS is the study of a multiplicity of humanity subjects, including Geography, History, Civics and Citizenship, Economics and Business. Each subject contains two interrelated strands: Knowledge and Understanding, which includes the key concepts and content for each subject and Inquiry Skills that may be taught discretely or as part of an inquiry approach. Geography is a mandatory subject in Australian schools from Foundation (approximately five years of age) to Year 8 (about 14 years of age). During the writing stages of the HASS curriculum, each HASS subject area was initially designed as a separate learning area; history, geography; civics and citizenship; economics and business. However, they were later combined to form a single subject, HASS, due to the concerns of an overcrowded curriculum (ACARA 2015a). Today, primary schools often teach geography as a sub-strand in a combined HASS subject. Most Australian States and Territories have adopted (and slightly modified) either: • the Geography curriculum developed by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) for Years F–10, or • the alternative humanities and social sciences curriculum for F–6, also developed by ACARA, followed by the geography curriculum for Years 7–10. Primary school students, from Foundation to Year 6 explore “local and distant places, investigate and explain places and environments, learn a little about each continent, explore the concept of sustainability, and study the world’s diversity of environments, peoples, cultures and economies” (National Committee for Geographical Sciences (NCGS) 2018, p. 84). Table 1 presents the interdisciplinary

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

23

Table 1  Australian Primary School HASS: Concepts of interdisciplinary thinking Concepts Significance The importance of an issue, event, person, development, place, process, interaction or system over time and place

Geography as an example The significance of where things are located on the surface of the earth, and how they have been defined, named and given meaning in relation to security, identity, sense of belonging, wellbeing and opportunities. The importance of the environment, its systems and processes, to the wellbeing of human and other life, and the significance of sustainable development for preferred futures. The ways places are arranged and environments modified to enable liveability and important human activity. Cyclical continuities and changes in natural systems in Continuity and change different places and over different time frames (e.g., seasons), Aspects of society – and how people perceive and represent environmental institutions, ideas, values and problems – that have stayed the continuities and changes in diverse ways. Modifications to environments as humans interact with the resources and same and changed over time (some point in the past and the processes within them, and ways that humans manage sustainability and change in natural and constructed present) or in the past (two environments. How current processes of change can be used to points in the past) predict change in the future and influence views of preferred sustainable futures. How factors of culture, values, population, economy and Cause and effect technology affect how people perceive, adapt to and use The long-term and short-term similar environments in different ways. How cause-effect causes and the intended and unintended consequences of an relationships cross scales from the local to the global and the global to the local, such as the effect of local rubbish on far event, decision, process, away marine ecosystems. How human characteristics of a interaction or development place (e.g., economy, culture) are influenced by its environmental characteristics and resources; and how environmental characteristics of a place are influenced by human actions and environmental processes, over short to long time periods and at different scales. How places are described according to size, location, shape, Place and space boundaries, features and environmental and human The characteristics of places characteristics, which can be tangible (e.g., landforms or (spatial, social, economic, people) or intangible (e.g., culture or scenic quality). How physical, environmental) and spaces are perceived, structured, organised and managed by how these characteristics are people, and can be designed and redesigned to achieve organised spatially (location, particular purposes. The individual characteristics of places distribution, pattern) and how they form spatial distributions such as population density, urban patterns and road networks. The diversity of perceptions, experiences and feelings people Perspectives and action have for places at scales from the local to global, and how The ways in which different people convey the value of places through representations, individuals and groups view actions and ways of caring. How people’s connections and something – a past or present issue, idea, event, development, proximity to other people and places affect their awareness and opinions. The diverse views on how progress towards person, place, process or sustainability should be achieved, and the worldviews that interaction – and how these inform these views such as stewardship. views influence their actions Modified from ACARA (2015b)

24

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

concepts of the HASS curriculum. The HASS curriculum consists of five concepts common to the four sub-strands (History, Geography, Civics and citizenship, and Economics and Business). Each concept is interpreted in Table  1 using the sub-­ strand Geography as an example. The writing of the Geography curriculum as a separate subject was of significance in Australia. It was the first time that the discipline of Geography was identified as a stand-alone subject for primary school students. Previously, geographical concepts and skills were integrated and called Studies of Society and Environment (SOSE), Humanities or Social Studies, depending upon the preference of each State and Territory. The HASS curriculum is written as separate subjects yet intended to be integrated. This requirement is a challenge for primary teachers as they must be generalists  – to teach English, mathematics, science, social sciences, creative arts, personal development and health. However, they do not receive training across all these subject areas, and few receive training in how to integrate concepts. As a result, we expect Australian primary school teachers to have the same interconnectivity questions of concern to the German primary school teachers rhetorically asked in the previous section. Most Australian primary teachers have not completed tertiary studies in the social sciences, let alone geography (AITSL 2011). Now that Australia has Geography as a unique subject in primary schools raises concern about how knowledgeable the teachers are to teach Geography. One Australian study explored primary pre-service teachers geographical knowledge and skills. Bourke and Lidstone (2015) conducted an online survey exploring gaps between pre-service teachers’ knowledge and skills to enact and deliver the Geography curriculum. Less than half of the pre-service respondents recalled studying Geography content at primary school – most likely in the SOSE subject mentioned earlier. The respondents recalled mapping, excursions, and negativity towards Geography. Bourke and Lidstone provide extensive discussion on various discourses relating to primary geography and conclude that effective teaching of Geography in primary schools will not occur unless there are transformations in pre-service teacher education. For example, pre-service teachers’ conception of geography needs to shift from one of a narrow information-oriented perspective to one that reflects Geography as a way of exploring, analysing and understanding our world. The report Geography: Shaping Australia’s Future (NCGS 2018) discusses Geography teacher education and subject knowledge. The “results suggest that a number of university teacher education programs provide insufficient preparation for effective geography teaching” (NCGS 2018, p. 85). The report also highlights the importance of the teachers’ subject knowledge in addressing student alternative conceptions. Lane (2015) identified the implications of having a primary school workforce of teachers with low subject knowledge. Such teachers: • are selective of curriculum content, and this narrows the curriculum as they avoid teaching complex concepts • tend to focus on issues and impacts at the expense of geographical processes • gravitate towards unstructured inquiry-based approaches for teaching concepts

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

25

• have an overreliance on textbook-based teaching and the rigid use of commercial teaching units • fail to intervene effectively during instruction to improve student learning • focus on the transmission of factual content through teacher exposition • are reluctant to allow extended open discussion in the classroom • desire to stick to the script regardless of student feedback • provide students with abundant facts to compensate for their gaps in understanding A further challenge for primary school Geography in Australia is that Geography is mainly perceived to belong to the Humanities and not the Sciences. As alluded to earlier, there is an overlap between the Science curriculum and the Geography curriculum in Australia – and quite possibly elsewhere. This is an obvious indication that Geography is partly a Science – it spans the natural and social sciences. The Australian Geography curriculum includes scientific concepts and ideas not in the primary school science curriculum. These include climate types (Year 3), vegetation types (Year 4), and environmental sustainability (Year 4 onwards) (NCGS 2018). In Australian Universities, one studies Geography from within the Science Faculty, yet in schools, Geography is not considered a Science. Interestingly, in Victoria (an Australian State), Geography is recognised as partially a STEM subject that develops and applies specific STEM skills. In the Victorian Curriculum: Geography F-10 (the Victorian version of the Australian Curriculum: HASS), the Rationale includes: … aspects of Geography are a component of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), fostering the development and application of distinctive STEM skills. Students learn to question why the world is the way it is, reflect on their relationships with and responsibility for that world and propose actions designed to shape a socially just and sustainable future.

“An awareness that school geography extends beyond its humanities perspectives, and also has significant scientific content, would be greatly helped if it was nationally recognised as partially a STEM subject” (NCGS 2018, p. 87).

Conclusion and Implications for Teacher Education The chapter considered the intended primary school Geography education from both Germany and Australia. These two countries mandate very different approaches to teaching primary school geographical content and skills. The German subject of Sachunterricht uses a Perspective Framework to draw content and skills from science and social sciences, whilst Australia has primary school children learning Geography as a discrete subject that can be integrated. Within the described integrative and multi-perspective approaches outlined in the chapter, the intention is for children to become enabled to learn systematically and reflectively and become empowered to shape their own environment. The children are to get fundamental insights into complex situations, problematic areas, and the mutual interdependence of the environment, society, and economy. Additionally, the approaches presented in

26

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

this chapter enable the connectivity towards the subject disciplines of secondary schools and the life experiences and interests of the children and thus contributes to developing the present and future learning of the children. One crucial factor for a lasting and effective education in primary school Geography is the professional competence of teachers to plan, teach and analyse geographical lessons drawing on the sciences and social sciences. Teacher education and training are decisively important. The teachers have to be able to integrate and implement the different concepts and perspectives competently. Therefore, teachers need to have appropriate knowledge and skills from different subjects and complimentary didactical and pedagogical expertise. Adequate conviction, commitment, self-regulative competencies, and integrative teaching motivation are needed. Children need to learn integrative thinking and the ability to solve societal problems as outlined by Klafki (1992), and that persists today under the guise of the UNESCO 2030 SDGs. Even in complex situations, problematic areas, or based on difficult questions, primary teachers should identify content-related reference points for their teaching. Additionally, they need to be competent to use the different subject-­ specific methods and skills to avoid declarative knowledge when teaching children. This includes understanding local conditions and the ability to reframe the examples into a more significant or even global context. To appropriately prepare this integrative, multi-perspective approach, teachers require competencies in different perspective areas. Therefore, teacher training institutions need to make a joint effort to meet these professional prerequisites.

References Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2015a) Draft changes to Australian Curriculum F-10 Consultation report. Retrieved from http://www.acara.edu.au/_ resources/Consultation_Report_-­_30_September_2015.pdf. Accessed 28 Dec 2021 Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2015b). F-6/7 Humanities and Social Sciences: Concepts of interdisciplinary thinking – Sub-strand illustrations. Retrieved from https://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/F-­67_HASS_Concepts_of_interdisciplinary_thinking_-­_sub-­strand_illustrations.pdf. Accessed 28 Dec 2021 Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL] (2011) Essential guide to professional learning series. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/toolsresources/resource/ essential-­guide-­to-­professional-­learning-­series. Accessed 28 Dec 2021 Bourke T, Lidstone J (2015) Mapping geographical knowledge and skills needed for pre-service teachers in teacher education. SAGE Open 5(1):2158244015577668 Catling S, Willy T, Butler J (2013) Teaching primary geography for Australian schools: early years to year 6. Hawker Brownlow Education, Victoria GDSU [Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts] (2003) Perspectives framework for general studies in primary education. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn GDSU [Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts] (2013) Perspektivrahmen Sachunterricht. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn Klafki W (1992) Allgemeinbildung in der Grundschule und der Bildungsauftrag des Sachunterrichts. In: Lauterbach R et  al (eds) Brennpunkte des Sachunterrichts. IPN, Kiel, pp 11–31

The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary…

27

Lane R (2015) Primary geography in Australia: pre-service primary teachers’ understandings of weather and climate. RIGEO 5:199–217 Luhmann N (1985/2004) Erziehender Unterricht als Interaktionssystem. In: Luhmann N (ed) Schriften zur Pädagogik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. Main, pp 11–22 Masters GN (2020) Nurturing wonder and igniting passion, designs for a new school curriculum: NSW curriculum review. Retrieved from https://research.acer.edu.au/nswcurriculumreview/6/. Accessed 28 Dec 2021 Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) (2008) Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. MCEETYA National Committee for Geographical Sciences (2018) Geography: shaping Australia’s future. Australian Academy of Sciences. Retrieved from https://www.science.org.au/supporting-­ science/science-­p olicy-­a nd-­s ectoranalysis/reports-­a nd-­p ublications/geography-­s haping. Accessed 28 Dec 2021 Schmeinck D, Hennemann T (2014) “Was sollen wir denn noch alles können?!” Kompetenzen in der LehrerInnenbildung aus Sicht der Sonderpädagogik und des Sachunterrichts. In: Bresges A et al (eds) Kompetenzen diskursiv. Terminologische, exemplarische und strukturelle Klärungen in der LehrerInnenbildung. Waxmann, Münster und New York, pp 47–78 UN General Assembly (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1. Retrieved from https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html. Accessed 22 Dec 2021

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future Andy Wi

Abstract  This chapter explores the value of primary school geography. It does so by exploring the historical trends of primary school geography educational research since 1902. The review of peer-reviewed journal articles indicates primary school geography is an under-researched area. There was a surge in articles published in the last decade due to the availability of technology used for mapping and data analysis. The journal International Research in Geography and Environmental Education is the leading academic outlet for primary geography education research publishing over one-third of all research since 1902. Before 2011, the geographical education research focus was on “children” and “curriculum”, however, after 2011 the focus shifted towards “how teachers teach” and “how children learn”. Keywords  Primary geography · COVID-19 · 21st Century skills · Sustainability

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has affected everyone around the world, both at the global and local levels. Economies have shut down, schools closed, food outlets ceased operations and even travelling has come to a stop. During this period, you no longer see groups of people clustering and interacting in public. COVID-19 had affected our daily habits, movements, work and even our leisure. It seems like a scene taken from a doomsday blockbuster movie. Regardless of whether COVID-19 is a bane or blessing, it has brought about a greater awareness of geographical concepts. Suddenly everyone (from kindergarten children up to adults) is very interested in knowing where the location of the country, the places with the most cases, the spread of the virus, the time taken, policies to mitigate the virus… etc. This all leads to greater awareness and interest in geography. Perhaps not so much as the subject of Geography, but in terms of the “seven A. Wi (*) National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_3

29

30

A. Wi

geographical concepts of place, space, environment, interconnection, sustainability, scale and change” (MOE 2014; IGU 1992). Geography is a unique subject as it helps people to link events together and understand the interrelationship between these events. Let’s take the COVID-19 pandemic as an example, everyone (young and old) are both fascinated and fearful of this virus and its mutations. While there are many reports both in print, in the media and on the internet, most people are drawn to the number of cases per day, the total number of cases, number of deaths, countries affected and types of precautions to take. I see people neglecting other valuable factors and information provided by the media. Do not take me wrongly, I am not saying that this is bad, it is just that Geography is more than just an isolated event. The International Geographical Union defines Geography as “the study of human activities and their interrelationships and interactions with environments from local to global scales” (CGE 2016, p. 4). In this current context, it is a subject that educates people on the pandemic situation and how to respond to and take action to safeguard themselves and the community. Therefore, both Geography and environmental educators have the responsibility to develop the students environmental understanding, values, and behaviour (Chang and Wi 2018). Thus, what we explore here is the notion of sustainability. Geography is very much about sustainability as it has a natural focus on a vision of societies that live in balance with our Earth’s carrying capacity. School Geography offers learners a context for developing active, global citizenship by developing an understanding of the interdependencies of the natural and man-made environments. It is in times like the current pandemic that we are reminded of the importance of geographical knowledge, skills and understandings for a sustainable future. This chapter examines this notion of sustainability in primary school Geography.

Learning About the Environment Geography education is significant for young children as the first thing they experience in life is the place around them. During the Nursery and kindergarten years, children are exposed to places around their house and community. For example, the trees, the birds, and plants around them. As the children interact with the environment, they learn to notice the leaves swaying and rustling in the wind, the butterfly fluttering around the flowers, the way the plants grow. Geography comes alive when children experience nature and the environment by themselves. Children develop knowledge and skills based on their interaction and experience with the world around them (Alexander 2010). Through the children’s daily interaction, they will gain knowledge and experiences about the world around them. Learning geography enables children to experience the place and space around him/ her and to understand the interrelationship between people and the environment (CGE 2016, p. 4). However, children might not understand that this knowledge is useful geographical knowledge which will lead them to a deeper conceptual

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

31

understanding of the interaction between people and the environment. Rickinson et al. (2009) informed us that children’s senses and knowledge of geography are akin to their experiences and interests and what makes the best sense to them. Therefore, it is important that children go to school to acquire new knowledge that is beyond their experiences (Slater et  al. 2016). In simple terms, the school will provide the content knowledge and through their daily lives experience the joy in learning and interacting with the environment.

Learning Primary Geography Children nowadays do not come to class and ‘absorb’ everything the teacher teaches, but rather, they come to class with a set of beliefs and understanding of their environment. They can interact with their teachers and peers as “co-learners” using their personal and everyday geographic experiences. Thus, school geography can not only excite a child’s curiosity and interest but also enhance their understanding of the world around them (Catling 2014). For example, Geography in Singapore is not taught in primary school as a subject but integrated into the social studies subject (Fang 2002; Chang 2014). Primary school children learn about the world they live in and the relationship between people, places, and the environment in the social studies subject. They also learn to respect people of different cultures and develop a sense of responsibility towards the environment (Curriculum Planning and Development Division 2008; MOE Singapore 2009; Chang 2014). Children are inquisitive by nature and the inquiry approach in the social studies subject aims to motivate children to inquire into things that interest them. Piaget’s Constructivist Theory of Learning states that children actively learn, and construct knowledge based on their own experiences (Elliott et al. 2000). This implies that a child’s understanding of the world is dependent on their existing experiences. Arends (1998) states that a child’s construction of meaning can also be influenced by their prior knowledge and the situation. This will result in new or modified knowledge based on the new learning experiences (Phillips 1995). The strength of the inquiry approach is that it considers students’ prior knowledge, experiences, and their assumptions. This enables child-centred learning where the child takes ownership of creating new understanding and knowledge for themselves. The study of geography is unique because it comes alive when children learn knowledge, interact with the environment, and share their experiences with other children (Chang and Wi 2018). This begets the questions: Are the students learning the same way as the students many years before? Are the teachers still teaching the same curriculum with the same old style? Are the objectives still the same? How does geography differ from the yesteryears? These questions are important given the crises the world is currently experiencing. For example, the continuation of hunger and starvation, the continuation of climate change and global warming and now the COVID-19 pandemic.

32

A. Wi

 eview of Primary Geography Education Articles R in International Journals This chapter examines research articles relating to primary geography education, sourced from peer-reviewed journals found in the online resource library. It is important to caveat that there might be other primary geography articles published in hardcopies. However, the articles examined here are mainly those that are available and accessible online during times of pandemic lockdowns. The initial search results of “Primary Geography” resulted in 270,058 items. However, not all of these are specific to the related topic of discussion. A refined search in relation to the discipline of Geography resulted in 35,638 items followed by an advanced search of “education” that resulted in 5,851 items. As defined in the introduction, Primary geography is basically primary school level (age 7–12). Filtering for this age group resulted in 189 items. These 189 items were individually assessed to determine suitability and alignment to the requirement of Primary Geography. The analysis was conducted in three steps: 1. The articles were plotted on a histogram to analyse whether there were any trends and patterns. 2. Examine the abstract of the publications and create the word cloud to examine the word frequency in each abstract. 3. Examine the types of journals and their publication throughout the years. 1. Frequency Chart The online search resulted in articles all the way from 1902 to 2020. The first article was in 1902 and was just titled “Primary Geography”. The histogram below shows the number of articles published over the period of 1902 to 2020 (See Fig. 1). A total of 149 published articles on Primary geography.

Fig. 1  Histogram of the number of articles published over the years

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

33

From 1902 to 1979, there are only 1–4 articles pertaining to primary geography published in any particular decade of that 76-year period. From 1980 onwards, the number increased to about 10 in a decade and reached 22 in the period of 2000–2010. It would be unrealistic to assume that there were very little or no written articles about primary geography during the olden days, However, it is safe to say that there is not much interest in primary geography and therefore journals may have chosen not to publish it and/or very few authors writing about it. Also, this lack of interest may also be indicative of early work not being selected for digitisation. From 2010, there is a great jump in the number of articles regarding primary geography. This was the result of the growing interest in spatial education within the geography discipline (Soja 2009), spurred the development of digital mapping tools and data resources (Mostern 2010; IRMA 2013). With reference to this phenomenon, this chapter will set this as the middle ground and examine the 60 articles published before 2011 and the 89 articles published from 2011 onwards.

Comparing Word Clouds The word clouds were created based on the abstracts of the geography articles. Word count can be used to identify patterns more easily, verify the hypothesis and maintain analytic integrity (Leech and Onwuegbuzie 2011). This means that themes and codes were counted to assist the researcher in understanding what concepts were predominantly discussed. While the word cloud is not a statistical measure, it is a statistic that provided an indication of the number of times each word was used. Table 1 provides a detailed account of abstract word frequencies. 49 words were found to describe the research pertaining to primary geography. There are four levels in the word cloud, namely from the biggest in size to the smallest in size. Therefore, in the analysis, we will be using Level 1 to mean the words with the largest font size, level 2 to mean the words with the second-largest font size and so forth.

Level 1 Words Comparing the Level 1 words from both word clouds (See Figs. 2 and 3), there are four key elements that have remained unchanged, namely “education”, “school”, “primary” and “geography”. It is interesting to note that before 2011, the key focus was on “children” and “curriculum”, however from 2011, the focus shifted to “teachers” and “learning”. Upon further analysis, it is not so much as children and curriculum are replaced, but the focus shifted towards “how teachers teach” and “how children learn”. Therefore, children (synonyms: pupils/students) and curriculum have moved to level 2 of the word clouds.

34

A. Wi

Table 1  Overall word frequencies

Word Education

Weighted percentage Count (%) 840 5.03

Geography

548

4.01

Learning

566

2.57

Teachers Primary Study

267 228 421

1.95 1.60 1.60

Research

209

1.32

Students

181

1.32

Children Place

131 221

0.96 0.83

Curriculum Subject

122 228

0.79 0.77

Similar words Civilization, cultivation, derived, develop, developed, developing, development, didactics, educated, educates, education, education’, educational, educationally, educators, educators’, elicit, instruction, instructional, pedagogic, pedagogical, pedagogies, pedagogy, preparation, prepare, preparing, school, schooling, schools, teach, teaching, ‘teaching, training Geographers, geographic, geographies, geography, geography’ Acquired, acquisition, condition, conditioning, conditions, determinant, determine, determined, instruction, instructional, knowing, knowledge, knowledge’, knowledges, learn, learned, learning, learning’, memorise, reading, scholarship, studied, studies, studies’, study, studying, takes, taking, teach, teaching, ‘teaching Instructor, teachers Elementary, elements, mainly, master, primary Analyse, analysed, analyses, analysing, analyze, analyzed, analyzing, consider, considered, considering, considers, contemplate, discipline, disciplined, disciplines, examination, examine, examined, examines, examining, field, field’, fields, report, reported, reports, studied, studies, studies’, study, studying, subject, subjectively, subjectivity, subjects, subjects’, survey, surveyed, surveys, worked, working, works Enquiry, exploration, explore, explored, explores, exploring, inquiry, investigate, investigated, investigates, investigating, investigation, research, researched, researchers, searches Pupil, pupils, pupils’, pupils’, scholars, students, students’, students’ Children Aimed, commitment, committed, direct, direction, directly, grade, grades, identified, identifies, identify, identifying, local, localised, localities, locally, located, location, locational, locations, order, place, placed, places, point, points, positioning, positive, positively, range, ranging, rates, seating, setting, settings, sites, situated, situation, situations, space, spaces, targeted Curriculum, program, programme, programmes, programs Capabilities, capability, capable, cases, content, contention, contents, depended, issue, issued, issues, matter, matters, nation, national, nationality, nationally, nations, subject, subjectively, subjectivity, subjects, subjects’, theme, themed, themes, topic, topics (continued)

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

35

Table 1 (continued)

Word Paper

Weighted percentage Count (%) 134 0.71

Results

139

0.64

Based

130

0.62

Using

144

0.62

Skills

122

0.62

Experiences

99

0.56

Indicate

146

0.55

World

106

0.54

Making

177

0.53

Similar words Document, documentation, documented, documents, paper, papers, report, reported, reports, theme, themed, themes Answer, answered, attend, attendance, attended, consequence, consequent, consequently, effect, ‘effect, effective, effectively, effectiveness, effects, event, events, issue, issued, issues, leading, leads, leave, outcomes, result, resultant, resulting, results, solutions Based, bases, basis, establish, established, floor, found, foundation, fundamental, ground, grounded, grounds, meaning, meanings, means, rooted, stand, standing, stands, theme, themed, themes Applied, applies, apply, consumption, employability, employed, employers, enjoyed, enjoyment, exercise, function, functional, functions, practical, practice, practices, purpose, purposes, purposively, roles, usage, useful, usefulness, using, utilised, utilization, utilize, utilized, utilizes, utilizing Acquired, acquisition, attainment, expert, experts, goods, practical, practice, practices, science, sciences, skill, skills Experience, experienced, experiences, experiment, experimental, experimentally, experiments, getting, knowing, lived, lives, living, received, receives Argue, argued, argues, arguing, design, designed, designers, index, indicate, indicated, indicates, indication, indications, indicators, point, points, reading, showed, showing, shows, signal, signals, suggest, suggested, suggesting, suggestions, suggests Domain, earth, exist, existing, exists, global, globalizing, globally, globe, human, humanities, ‘humanities’, public, publication, publicly, temporal, universities, university, world, worldwide Attainment, build, building, cause, causes, causing, clear, clearly, constitute, constituted, constitutes, construct, constructed, construction, constructions, create, created, creating, drawing, drawings, draws, establish, established, fashion, formed, forming, forms, getting, hitting, inducing, makes, making, named, namely, names, nominal, preparation, prepare, preparing, produced, producing, qualifications, reach, realising, realized, score, scored, scores, stimulate, stimulating, takes, taking, worked, working, works (continued)

36

A. Wi

Table 1 (continued)

Word Support

Weighted percentage Count (%) 125 0.53

Approach

87

0.52

Understanding 102

0.49

Findings

89

0.49

Activities

84

0.48

Related

112

0.47

Concepts

102

0.47

Important

105

0.46

Value

74

0.45

Similar words Assistance, assistant, assisted, document, documentation, documented, documents, encourage, encouragement, encourages, encouraging, endured, enduring, friends, funded, funding, funds, helped, helper, lived, lives, living, reinforces, sponsored, stand, standing, stands, subscribe, substantial, substantially, suffer, support, supported, supporting, supportive, supports, sustainability, sustainable, underpin, underpinned, underpinning, underpinnings Access, accessibility, accessible, advance, advances, approach, approached, approaches, comes Clear, clearly, comprehensive, comprehensively, interpretation, interpretations, interpretative, interpreted, interpreting, perceive, perceived, reading, realising, realized, reason, reasons, understand, understanding, understanding’, understandings Chance, determinant, determine, determined, encounters, finding, findings, finds, getting, happened, noticeable, observations, observe, observed, observer, obtain, obtained, received, receives, regain Action, actions, active, actively, activities, activity, dynamic, dynamics, participant, participants, participants’, participated, participating, participation, trips Associate, associated, association, comparably, comparative, compare, compared, concern, concerned, concerning, concerns, connect, connected, ‘connected, connection, connections, connectivities, deals, interrelate, interrelated, linked, links, proportion, reference, references, referred, referring, refers, related, relates, relating, relation, relational, relative, relatively Concept, conception, conceptions, concepts, construct, constructed, construction, constructions, design, designed, designers, innovation, innovations, innovative, innovators, notion, notions Authoritative, consequence, consequent, consequently, crucial, implications, importance, important, meaning, meanings, means, moment, moments, significance, significant, significantly Appreciate, appreciated, appreciating, assess, assessed, assesses, assessing, assessment, assessments, esteem, evaluate, evaluates, evaluating, evaluation, evaluations, evaluative, measure, measures, rates, respectively, value, valued, values (continued)

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

37

Table 1 (continued)

Word Development

Weighted percentage Count (%) 127 0.42

Provide

67

0.42

Knowledge

121

0.42

Level

85

0.42

Different

52

0.37

Spatial Focus

50 60

0.37 0.37

Showed

132

0.35

Article Engagement

47 75

0.34 0.34

Social Considered

46 115

0.34 0.33

Changes

56

0.32

National

96

0.32

Perceptions

64

0.32

Similar words Acquired, arise, arises, arising, breaks, develop, developed, developing, development, evolution, formulation, getting, growing, growth, modern, modernity, originality, produced, producing, rising Leave, offer, offering, offers, provide, provided, providers, provides, providing, supply Cognition, cognitive, initial, initially, initiate, initiatives, knowing, knowledge, knowledge’, knowledges Degree, degrees, equal, equality, evenly, floor, grade, grades, layered, level, levels, point, points, stage, stages, stories, story Differ, difference, differences, different, divergence, divergences Spatial, spatialities, spatially Center, centered, centering, centers, centre, centred, concentrated, direct, direction, directly, focus, focused, focuses, focusing Appear, appears, demonstrate, demonstrated, demonstrates, demonstrating, depicted, displayed, establish, established, evidence, evident, exhibit, exhibiting, expressed, expressing, expression, picture, present, presentation, presented, presenting, presents, reading, record, register, registers, showed, showing, shows, viewed, views Article, articles, bounded Books, employability, employed, employers, engage, engaged, engagement, engagements, engaging, involved, involvement, involving, locke, operate, operations, participant, participants, participants’, participated, participating, participation, pursued, takes, taking Social, socialise, socialising, socially, societal Believe, believed, conceive, conceived, consider, considered, considering, considers, counted, deals, debate, debates, regard, regarding, takes, taking, think, thinking, viewed, views Altering, change, changes, changing, commuting, deepen, shift, shifting, transfer, transferring, varied, varies, variety, varying Communicating, communication, communications, communities, community, countries, country, internal, international, internationally, nation, national, nationality, nationally, nations, state, states, states’ Appreciate, appreciated, appreciating, insight, insights, noticeable, observations, observe, observed, observer, perception, perceptions, sense, senses, sensing (continued)

38

A. Wi

Table 1 (continued)

Word Nature

Weighted percentage Count (%) 63 0.31

Context

50

0.30

Integrated

58

0.29

Project

85

0.29

Similar words Biological, biology, course, courses, cultivation, establish, established, natural, nature, natures Circumstance, circumstances, context, contexts, setting, settings Constitute, constituted, constitutes, desegregation, incorporate, incorporated, inherent, integral, integrated, integrating, integration, integrative, mixed, structural, structure, structured, total, unified Design, designed, designers, externally, figure, figures, image, images, picture, plan’, planning, plans, project, proposal, propose, proposed, proposes, proposing, tasks, undertake, visual, visualization

Fig. 2  Word cloud for articles published before 2011

Level 2 Words There are also key differences in the word clouds. After doing a simple matching of the words, there is a shift in focus. For example, the emphasis on place has been replaced with space and the learning support has been replaced with active learning as indicated in Table 2. Although the expression of “place” and “space” has often been used interchangeably, they have been extensively conceptualised in human geography (Koops and Galič 2017). According to Tuan (1977), “space” is an open space or location that

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

39

Fig. 3  Word cloud for articles published from 2011 onwards Table 2  Differences over time Before 2011 Development Place Initial Understanding Support

From 2011 onwards Knowledge Space Results Perceptions Active

has no social connection but may be marked off or defended against intruders. While “place” can be any location that has meaning or has some human experience involved (Tuan 1977). The shifts in geographical context could be also due to the digital mapping tools and data resources as mentioned in the previous section (Mostern 2010; IRMA 2013). This could have indirectly resulted in the change in the researchers’ focus when writing the geographical article. To caveat, this is but one possibility, as there is insufficient evidence to state that this is the only reason. Other influences on geographical curriculum can be due to political, environmental issues, cultural, economics… etc. Other differences can be attributed to the educational development and focus. As described in the previous section, the importance of not just educating children on content knowledge but in the form of active learning which requires them to perceive and feel for the world around them.

40

A. Wi

Types of Journals Although there were quite a few journals publishing between 1 and 3 articles about primary geography, they are either (all) in special issues or once in more than two years. Therefore, this part of the analysis will focus on journals with at least 5 published articles over the last 10 years. Tables 3 and 4 list the journals publishing five or more articles. From Tables 3 and 4, we can see there are two journals that have been consistently publishing articles on primary geography. Namely “International Research in Geography and Environmental Education” and “Journal of Geography”. A quick search on the remaining journals found that several of the journals (before 2011) focus on a specific education level and/or specific targeted group or topics. It is promising that from 2011 onwards, besides these two journals, there are four other journals that accept article contributions with regards to primary geography. This brings us to the question: How then can primary geography be sustainable?

Sustainability and Primary Geography The aim of Geography is to help learners learn about the present and prepare for the future. However, educating this new generation requires both an ideal curriculum (Kagawa and Selby 2012) and geography trained educators (Chang and Pascua 2015). Puttick (2018) states that Geography examines issues on the global scale, the Table 3  Number of journal articles published by journals before 2011 Journal articles (before 2011) Geography International Research in Geography and Environmental Education Journal of Geography Teaching Geography Total

Number of articles 9 14 12 11 46

Table 4  Number of journal articles published by journals from 2011 onwards Journal articles (2011 and after) Children Geographies Education 3–13 Geography Education International Research in Geography and Environmental Education Journal of Geography Review of International Geography Education Online Total

Number of articles 7 5 5 19 9 10 55

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

41

human-environmental interaction and connectedness, however, the sustainability aspect is quite limited. As Lambert (2009) puts it, children cannot be taught simply to think, they must be directed on what to think about. This implies that educators need to have a strong foundation in geography content knowledge before being able to teach geography successfully.

Teaching Geography Education – Content and Everyday One key challenge that primary teachers face is becoming knowledgeable enough about geography to be able to teach it well. While there is evidence of some good practices in geography teaching, good quality geography appears to be in the minority in primary classrooms. Catling (2015) found that many primary teachers lack the confidence to teach geography and rely heavily on textbooks and suggested materials. Therefore, it is important to consider the teacher’s preconceptions, content knowledge and views of the subject as these indirectly affect the teaching and classroom practices (Catling 2004; Corney 2000; Lane and Coutts 2012; Martin 2000). One way is to increase the teachers’ level of proficiency in geography and their content knowledge is through teacher education. During an international conference, a renowned professor once asked the class “Are you a geographer or an educator?” This question got many participants thinking and while many have the perception that they are geographers, being someone who disseminates information, as explained by the professor, they are only educators. Geographers are people who not only educate but view themselves as a part of the environment and recognises the interaction happening within the environment. A primary geography teacher not only needs to be aware of the differences between everyday geography and academic geography but also understands the connections between the two. Martin (2008a) believes that it is necessary to enable students to recognize the value of their everyday experience and that they are already thinking geographically in their everyday lives. While children have built up a wide knowledge base about the world through their daily direct and indirect experience, they are unable to see the usefulness of their geographical knowledge and thus unable to make connections. Therefore, a geography educator should be able to help children make connections between their everyday experiences and also make sense of the world using the big ideas of geography, such as place, connectedness, scale, process, and skills (Martin 2008b). This implies that the teacher plays an important role in the curriculum-making process (Lambert and Hopkin 2014). What this means is that teachers are to decide on the key concepts and how best to use learning activities to help students think geographically. Therefore, it is critical for teachers to have deep disciplinary knowledge and understanding to select good resources and determine how best to teach the subject during their lessons. (Chang and Wi 2018)

42

A. Wi

The Future of Primary Geography  he Relevance of, and Ideas for, Assessment of Sustainability T Learnings in the Primary School The COVID-19 pandemic has indeed affected our daily way of life; be it to work, at home and even our daily leisure activities. It is a complex problem that goes beyond businesses, the healthcare economy, political boundaries and even the environment. It cuts across disciplinary boundaries and societies and requires integrated knowledge and skills to mitigate and adapt to the new normal. It forces educators to rethink how we teach and learn, from the university level to the primary school level. This makes me reflect upon what geography education can contribute to in the situation. Can a Geography education provide educators, politicians, researchers, and medical staff with enough geographical knowledge which will help with the situation? Can a Geography education help identify the different locations and limitations found within the different countries, cultures, and societies differences? In this technologically driven globalised world, geography is an important aspect because of the interconnectedness of the people, societies, and businesses across the world. People and countries no longer work in isolation as they need to interact with other people for financial, business, social and health factors. Thus, due to the ever-­ changing and evolving demographics and technological advancement of the 21st century, students have to be prepared to face these challenges and opportunities. Rawding (2013) suggests that school geography should be more innovative, dynamic, and relevant for students. Geography has the capacity to develop students’ inquiry and decision-making skills (Butt 2011). Besides the importance of knowledge, attitude and values, the International Geography charter also included the 21st Century skills (IGU 1992). The 21st Century skills are broken down into 3 main category skill sets with 12 abilities (Pauw 2015; MOE 2014). This outlines the skills that today’s students need to succeed in their careers during the Information Age. 1. Learning skills 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4.

Critical thinking Creativity Collaboration Communication

2. Literacy Skills 2.1. Information literacy 2.2. Media literacy 2.3. Technology literacy 3. Social Skills 3.1. Flexibility 3.2. Leadership

Primary Geography for a Sustainable Future

43

3.3. Initiative 3.4. Productivity 3.5. Social skills Each skill is unique in how it helps students, and they are intended to help students keep up with the modern world. However, it is also important to note the key that ties all these together which is Geography. Geography is unique because it provides learners with an opportunity to explore the relationship between the earth and its people (in terms of place, space, scale, and time). It also allows learners to examine and understand the local interactions and global interdependence (Catling 1999) and also allows learners to examine how places change over time and space (Hinde 2015). Geography helps connect everything around us together. It makes the world more meaningful and enables us to understand how connected we are with our surroundings. Although geography prepares students for the challenges of the global world, it is also necessary to equip teachers with adequate knowledge and skills to adapt to the changes as well (Chang 2012). The COVID-19 pandemic begs the question: Is COVID-19 here to stay and will this epidemic reignite the interest in geography? Even kindergarten kids know about the COVID-19 pandemic, where it came from, what to do and how to prevent it. Isn’t it time for the higher-ups to perhaps see Geography in a different light? As a driver for skill development to a sustainable future? Perhaps this is just the tip of the iceberg and perhaps the solutions lie not in our generation but in the future generation. But no matter when it is, the key is that primary geography should set the foundation to help children enjoy learning and making connections with the world around them. Primary geography should help children develop knowledge and skills based on their interaction and experience with the world around them (Alexander 2010) to adapt to the future of a highly connected and technologically driven local-global world.

References Arends RI (1998) Resource handbook. Learning to teach, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston Alexander R (2010) Children, their world, their education. In: Alexander R (ed) Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge primary review. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 63–72 Butt G (2011) Introduction. In: Butt G (ed) Geography, education and the future. Continuum, London, p 111 Catling S (2004) An understanding of geography: the perspectives of English primary trainee teachers. Geo J 60:148158 Catling S (1999) Issues for research in UK primary geography. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 8(1):60–65 Catling S (2014) Giving younger children voice in primary geography: empowering pedagogy–a personal perspective. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 23(4):350–372 Chang (2014) Is Singapore’s school geography becoming too responsive to the changing needs of society

44

A. Wi

Chang CH, Wi A (2018) Why the world needs geography knowledge in global understanding: an evaluation from a climate change perspective. In: Geography education for global understanding. Springer, Cham, pp 29–42 Commission on Geographical Education (CGE) (2016) International charter on geographical education, International Geographical Union – CGE. Retrieved April 4, 2022 from http://www. igu-CGE.org/ Corney G (2000) Student geography teachers’ pre-conceptions about environmental topics. Environm Educ Res 6(4):313329 Curriculum Planning and Development Division (2008) Social studies syllabus: Primary. Retrieved April 4, 2022 from Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education Singapore: http://www.moe.gov.sg Elliott SN, Kratochwill TR, Littlefield Cook J, Travers J (2000) Educational psychology: effective teaching, effective learning, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill College, Boston Fang S (2002) A historical development of the primary social studies curriculum in Singapore. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Hinde ER (2015) Geography matters: teacher beliefs about geography in today’s schools Information Resources Management Association (IRMA) (ed) (2013) Geographic information systems: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications. Information Science Reference. International Geographical Union (IGU) (1992) The international charter for geography education. Retrieved from http://www.igu-­cge.org/charters.htm Koops B-J, Galič M (2017) Conceptualising space and place: lessons from geography for the debate on privacy in public. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786435408.00007 Lane R, Coutts P (2012) Students’ alternative conceptions of tropical cyclone causes and processes. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 21(3):205222 Leech NL, Onwuegbuzie AJ (2011) Beyond constant comparison qualitative data analysis: using NVivo. Sch Psychol Q 26(1):70 Lambert D, Hopkin J (2014) A possibilist analysis of the geography national curriculum in England. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 23:6478. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2013.858446 Martin F (2000) Postgraduate primary education students’ images of geography and the relationship between these and students’ teaching. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 9(3):223244 Martin F (2008a) Ethnogeography: towards a liberatory geography education. Child Geogr 6(4):437450 Martin F (2008b) Knowledge bases for effective teaching: beginning teachers’ development as teachers of primary geography. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 17(1):13–39 Ministry of Education (MOE), Singapore (2009) Desired outcomes of education. Retrieved from Ministry of Education: http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/files/desired-­outcomes-­of-­ education.pdf Ministry of Education Singapore (2014) 21st century competencies. Retrieved from http://www. moe.gov.sg/education/21cc Mostern R (2010) Putting the world in world history. J Assoc Hist Comput 13(1) Pauw, I. (2015) Educating for the future: the position of school geography. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 24(4):307–324 Puttick S (2018) A critical account of what “geography” means to primary trainee teachers in England. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ Phillips DC (1995) The good, the bad, and the ugly: the many faces of constructivism. Educ Res 24(7):5–12 Rickinson M, Lundholm C, Hopwood N (2009) Environ Learn. Springer, London Slater F, Graves N, Lambert D (2016) Editorial. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 25(3):189–194. Tuan Y (1977) Space and place: the perspective of experience. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography Niranjan Casinader

Abstract This chapter explores the need for geography educators to grasp Geography’s fundamental characteristic as a forum for transcultural education. Transcultural education is a form of teaching cultural understanding that meets the needs of our more globally oriented society. A comparative overview of the school curriculum frameworks that are relevant to education in Australia, Singapore, and Finland is made to illustrate how none of these countries specifically sees Geography as a vehicle for teaching cultural understanding. In all cases, the principle of developing cultural ‘understanding’ is seen as one of the generic skills and capabilities that need to be addressed across the whole curriculum. Developing cultural understanding in the primary school requires a progressive curriculum with its own sequence of implementation if it is to be developed within students. This cannot take place without consideration for the context of the primary school and the community in which it operates. Keywords  Transculturalism · Multiculturalism · Intercultural · Geography · Primary school

 he Principles and Goals of Primary Geography: Culture T as a Base One of the idiosyncrasies of the modern educational era is the paradox of the continuing division between the primary and secondary years of schooling, which remains instantiated in a number of forms. It can be seen not only in the construction and maintenance of primary and secondary schools as separate institutions, both in terms of geographical location and administration, but also in the separation between the primary and secondary years of schooling in terms of curriculum.

N. Casinader (*) Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_4

45

46

N. Casinader

With rare exceptions, such as the Primary-Secondary teacher education specialism at Monash University in Australia, the moulding of new teachers takes place with the ultimate aim of working in either a primary or secondary environment. Such persistent trends are in direct contradiction of the model philosophy of lifelong learning, which places more emphasis on the transitions of the individual at the first year of their formal schooling and at the end of that phase, which marks the beginning of their adult lives and beyond. In short, in purely learning and curriculum terms, there is no real need to separate the primary and secondary phases of schooling. The nearest that modern schools are moving towards recognition of this false dichotomy is the existence of Prep to Year 12 schools, institutions that are directed and structured and provide education from children from their first year of primary schooling until the last year of their secondary education. However, even within these holistic organisations, it is often the case that the primary and secondary schools are located and administered differently within the school structure. In Australia, there has also been a shift towards a belief in the middle years of schooling (Years 5–9) as a separate and necessary phase of educational focus, with a particular emphasis on the significance of Year 9 learning. This has resulted in some schools creating special subs-schools or even separate campuses as Middle Schools, and, in some cases, a sub-school or campus designated purely for Year 9 students. However, it can be argued that such movements have only served to reinforce a division of the sequence of learning, where none should technically exist. In the context of this separation of primary and secondary learning experiences, this chapter will argue that the existence of primary geography as the area of learning in the first years of formal schooling becomes even more fundamental than it might otherwise have been. Whatever the subject area, the first years of primary schooling are where children’s innate curiosity and willingness to accept difference and change are at their strongest, and it is necessary for the teaching profession to make the most of this learning phase in preparing the individual child for the world of their future. In the contemporary world, the centrality of globalisation has both created and maintained the need for young people to have developed that sense of a global place in their everyday lives. In the case of geographical education, this attribute has been identified and referred to as global understanding (Demirci et al. 2018), a fundamental base point from which children can apply and derive their learnings about the spatial interactions between people and their physical environments. At the core of that global understanding is an acceptance and understanding about the cultural complexity of the peoples that populate the planet, for one of the defining determinants of the impacts of contemporary globalisation has been the increasingly diverse nature of human societies in different locations across every continent. Without that fundamental capability, children of the current era will be left adrift, unable to adapt and respond to the cross-cultural interactions that will become an inevitable and persistent feature of everyday life, regardless of their position in society and the role they play within it. It is for this reason that it has become increasingly common for national or provincially focused curriculum frameworks in various countries to refer in some form

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

47

to the compulsory learning of cultural understanding, a process that is meant to begin from the very first years of schooling. What has been lost, however, is not only the innate capabilities of Geography as a discipline as a frame and conduit of cultural education, but also its place within primary education as a standalone subject. The political curriculum battles amongst policymakers have seen a gradual demise in the significance of mono-disciplinary education across the entire temporal learning spectrum, but particularly in the primary years of schooling. As a result, the teaching of cultural understanding as an effective feature of a child’s education has become diminished, as schools internationally have installed systems of an integrated curriculum, particularly in the areas of the so-called Humanities and Social Sciences, of which Geography is now seen to be a part. Ironically, in an educational environment that promotes the use of integrated curriculum as a more effective reflection of real-life learning, the common treatment of Geography as being more on a disciplinary par with History and Civics is problematic. Such a view ignores the conceptual and disciplinary differences between Geography and other subjects, but also ignores the reality that Geography, and thus geographical education, is an inherently integrated area of learning in itself, a bridge between the physical and human environments. Unlike the tertiary sector, which recognises this duality within the geographical discipline, primary and secondary school geography is left to flounder and find links with other areas of learning with which, for the most part, it has no ongoing relationship. If primary education in Geography is to succeed in achieving its naturally inclined goal as a leader in cultural education, it will be necessary for Geography teachers to centre their energies on promoting sound geographical education, even if this is taking place within a more integrated format. As will be argued later in this chapter, geography educators need to grasp the inherent advantages of Geography as a forum for transcultural education, a form of teaching cultural understanding that meets the needs of our more globally oriented society. Through transculturalism, the discipline of Geography can be transformed into an effective cultural learning program across the years of primary schooling, regardless of whether the subject exists in name in the primary school curriculum.

Notions of Cultural Education The Disjuncture Between the Past and Present One of the key advantages that the discipline of Geography has as a medium and provider of cultural education is that the holistic nature of its form of inquiry is synchronous with the form of cultural education that is required in the 21st century. As has been discussed in more depth elsewhere (Casinader 2016, 2020), one of the difficulties in the current phase of cultural education is that the conceptual base of that education is founded on ideas that evolved in the decades prior to contemporary globalisation, when population movement -and therefore cultural meetings between

48

N. Casinader

different peoples  – was relatively restricted and uncommon. In the 21st century, developments such as improved standards of living and communications and transport technologies, have meant that intranational and even international travel is part of the annual routines of many people, and for some, part of their daily lives. In the same vein, the increasing complexity of demographic movement has seen migration change the character of societies around the world; they are now far more likely to be culturally complex, making the meetings of different cultures a standard occurrence, unlike the era prior to the early 1990s. The current emphasis on what is called intercultural education has its basis in the 1970s and 1980s. It was a reaction to the original concept of multicultural education, which focused on learning about the lives and nature of people from different cultures (Coulby 2006). The essence of the intercultural paradigm was, and remains, the notion of communication between cultures, as well as an understanding of the power relationships between different cultures, and the forces of dominance that can be created by the imbalance between different cultural groups (Gundara and Portera 2008). It is the sense of social justice that is at the heart of postcolonial thinking in the cultural space, the dominance of Western or ‘white’ cultures over indigenous or local cultures that were a feature of European colonisation. It is inappropriate in this particular forum to delve into the finer points of the inadequacies of both multiculturalism and interculturalism for the modern age, but they are out of step with the modern context – that is, the standard nature of cultural diversity and demographic mobility within society  – and therefore a new paradigm of cultural education needs to be adopted; that is, transculturalism.

The Case for Transculturalism The key aspects of transculturalism as a basis for a more contemporary form of cultural education are its emphasis on a person’s attitude towards difference, and in particular, cultural difference (Casinader 2020). The existence of cultural diversity as a normative stage in human society in the current age means that the perception of cultural difference as some form of social anomaly is simply no longer viable. To be transcultural, therefore, is to see the existence of cultural differences as part of the expected and natural order of life. It is not a case of ignoring cultural difference; indeed, one of the other facets of transcultural thinking is clear acceptance of the validity of those other cultures to exist. It is more one of accepting the rights of other cultures to be approached as being equal to others. It should be emphasised here that such an approach does not mean that aspects of other cultures cannot be criticised or debated. However, it is more often than not the extremes of different cultures that become representative of zones of conflict in human society, whether virtually in the online space or in the physical world. Such a reality is currently represented by a range of conflict scenarios, ranging from the continuing and persistent challenges presented by the Taliban as an extreme form of Islamic thought, to the violent

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

49

Fig. 1  The progressive building of transcultural understanding

insularities presented by the conservative alt-right forces that have emerged over the recent decades across North America, Europe and Asia. The important aspect of a transcultural approach is that it is not a standalone concept. Conceptually and historically, and therefore educationally, it is a progression from the stages of learning represented by multicultural learning – which was the starting point for the next phase- and intercultural thinking, both of which have now become the launching pad for the new phase of transculturalism (see Fig. 1). Transculturalism in primary education does not replace multiculturalism and intercultural initiatives but builds upon them to extend the learnings and understandings of students in ways that are more relevant to the nature of human society in their future, and not that of the past, with which the adults who currently direct the nature of that education are more familiar. Thus, a transcultural approach to education does not replace what has gone before, but transforms and moulds it into a form of cultural education that meets the holistic needs of students in the current age: a knowledge of different cultures; the ability to communicate between different cultures, with an awareness of cultural power relativities; and acceptance of difference as the norm and natural state, in which no culture holds the automatic right to be assumed as being more relevant or ‘correct’ as others before it. This inherent acceptance of difference, and the expectation of difference, is translated in terms of geographical inquiry into the equal emphasis placed upon both human and physical environments that co-exist in any particular place (Casinader and Kidman 2017). Geographical inquiry, as a naturally integrated form of thinking, views the nature of the cultural difference in human society not as a barrier between cultures, but as an opportunity for interactions with each other. Consequently, geographical education that focuses on a transcultural approach is ideally placed to develop attitudes within students that are more aligned with the acceptance of different cultures, along with a desire and belief in the importance of knowing about those cultures (multicultural thinking) and the necessity of building bridges and understanding the relationships between cultures (intercultural thinking). It creates an attitudinal shift that views cultural difference as not a barrier to be overcome but as an interaction between peoples of different ways of and attitudes towards life, one that needs to be understood and not dismissed as an aberration.

50

N. Casinader

 ultural Perspectives in the National Curriculum: Jelly Beans C in a Jar of Primary Geography Overview The diverse ways in which teaching of cultural understanding is built into the teaching of primary geography can be seen in a comparative overview of the school curriculum frameworks that are relevant to education in Australia, Singapore, and Finland. The choice of these case studies is not meant to be totally representative of the full range of ways in which primary or elementary geography is enacted in schools globally. They are, however, reflective of different forms of society and national governance, and thus present examples of different approaches that have been taken to the teaching of geography in the primary levels and the location of cultural understanding within that teaching. What is salient in that comparison, however, is the diminished role that Geography now plays as a distinct discipline in primary education. The teaching of geography, let alone any geographical perspectives on the teaching of cultural understanding, is therefore even more dependent on the priorities and geographical expertise of individual teachers. Nevertheless, there are possibilities within such a barren landscape for geographical teaching of cultural understanding with a degree of lateral thinking and curriculum flexibility. Globally, the position of primary geography in schools is not strong, with little relationship to any particular national characteristic. In terms of sheer geographical size, Australia is the largest of the case studies and is representative of those countries that have a federal system of government. As the case with countries such as Germany, the USA, India and Spain, federalism inevitably has impacts on the educational provision, including guidelines set in terms of the school curriculum. In countries such as these, the national government generally only have responsibility for broad guidelines in curriculum design and delivery, often dependent on the agreement of the component states or provinces. In the Australian case, the Federal government is the only level of government that has the constitutional power to raise income tax and is therefore primarily the financial provider to the individual states, who then deliver a range of services to their own populations. Consequently, it is the individual states that have responsibility for the delivery of school education and any national initiatives in the educational sphere can only take place with the agreement of all governments concerned. It was not until 2010 that Australia had a designated national curriculum and a specially created national curriculum authority, both of which (at the time of writing) are currently under review. Under that national agreement, states do have the authority to modify the national curriculum to be more representative of their local circumstances, although only the states of Victoria and New South Wales have taken up that option to a large degree. Consequently, whilst Geography is allocated a separate disciplinary focus in the national curriculum as one of the domains under the banner of the secondary Humanities and Social Sciences learning area, the primary curriculum is phrased as an integrated HASS curriculum, with no particular

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

51

geographical focus. In contrast, however, under the current Victorian State government, the state version of the national curriculum (the Victorian Curriculum), Geography and History are taught as separate subjects in that state. Both Singapore and Finland are representative of much smaller countries in geographical size, but with very different social characteristics. Nonetheless, both countries mirror Australia in their acknowledgement and promotion of cultural understanding as necessary aspects of their national curriculum. It is an interesting reflection, to note, however, that both countries adopted such policies two decades before Australia, in large part due to their unitary form of national governance that did not require multilateral provincial agreements. Not only is Singapore much larger in terms of population, it is also a far more diverse society, with a multicultural mix of heritages including Chinese, Malay and, to a much lesser extent, Indian. National unity, and therefore cultural harmony, is a key goal of its educational system. The British influence of its colonial past still holds much sway in its educational principles, reflected in the continuing presence of Geography as an important secondary school discipline, unlike Finland. In contrast, Finland is much more of a monocultural society historically and remains largely so. However, it is also a country that made the decision to accept the reality of a growing global population of cultural diversity, along with its attendant characteristics of more frequent migration and population movement and adopt the teaching of cultural understanding as a fundamental school educational principle from the 1990s (Tani 2014). In its latest iteration, the importance of ‘cultural competence, interaction and expression’ is seen as being essential to the holistic development of a human being (Lähdemäki 2019) and is mandated as one of what are termed seven transversal competencies in its curriculum. Regardless of their individual circumstances, the result is that both countries, like Australia, made the choice to establish an integrated approach to the teaching of HASS ideas (commonly called Social Studies) in primary school; in other words, the teaching of Geography has been de-emphasised in importance. In Finland, geographical knowledge is taught as part of the geographical strand in Environmental Studies (Grades 3–4) and Social Studies (Grades 1–6). The perception that it is more a Science than a bridge between Science and the Humanities has led to “…the social dimension of the environment [being]neglected” (Tani 2004, p.  13). In Singapore, Geography is not a primary standalone subject either, and instead is taught as part of Social Studies: “the concepts in Geography at Primary schools are not made explicit but are often tacitly embedded within the context of social studies” (Chang 2012, p. 718). In terms of teaching cultural understanding and geographical education, then, none of these countries specifically sees Geography as a vehicle for teaching cultural understanding. In all cases, the principle of developing cultural ‘understanding’ is seen as one of the generic skills and capabilities that need to be addressed across the whole curriculum, and therefore by all learning areas. What is pertinent, however, is that all three include the possibility of building social cohesion and positive interactions with people of different cultures into their curriculum guidelines

52

N. Casinader

under Social Studies/HASS, of which Geography is seen to form a part, but such pathways are dependent very much on the approach of the individual school or teacher.

Australia as an Exemplar The complexity of the ways in which the connections between primary Geography and the teaching of cultural understanding are portrayed in national primary curricula is well exemplified by a specific case study. In the case of Australia, two contrasting curriculum structures both highlight, albeit somewhat surreptitiously, that primary geography does have a contribution to make in terms of teaching cultural understanding. In the Australian Curriculum, where the Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS) learning area is treated as an integrated subject of which Geography is a component discipline, the primary stated aim has a clear emphasis on the links between place (a foundational geographic concept) and culture in that it should: ensure that students develop: a sense of wonder, curiosity and respect about places, people, cultures and systems throughout the world, past and present, and an interest in and enjoyment of the study of these phenomena (ACARA 2020).

However, this is not replicated elsewhere in the HASS primary level documentation, Although the HASS structure is promoted, the Curriculum also specifies achievement standards for Geography, History and the other component HASS disciplines for each level of primary education. Given that the Australian Curriculum as a whole has Intercultural Understanding (ICU) as one of its mandated General Capabilities, it would be expected that this priority would be reflected in these Achievement Standards. However, it is not until Grade 3 that any clear mention of people in the context of place is mentioned: “…connections between people and the characteristics of places and recognise that people have different perceptions of places” (ACARA 2020). It is not until Grade 6 that mention is made of the “… diverse characteristics of places in different locations from local to global scales” (ACARA 2020), and the specific teaching of cultural understanding reflected in any of the HASS or subject-specific achievement standards. In the Victorian Curriculum, which treats Geography and other HASS disciplines as individual teaching areas, the mandated teaching of Intercultural Capability is enhanced by having its own curriculum scope and sequence included as part of the state’s curriculum, which is not the case with the Australian Curriculum. This increased emphasis on cultural understanding is also reflected more specifically in the Geography curriculum. For example, in Grade 2, students look at different cultural interpretations of weather and climate; in Grades 5 and 6, the study of ‘differences in the demographic, economic, social and cultural characteristics of people is specified’ (Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority 2020).

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

53

As commendable as these particular goals are, the nature of these education guidelines and cultural understanding can be classified as being essentially multicultural and/or intercultural in their conceptual frame. Even if it is implicit and not stated directly, the underlying principle within the goals of cultural understanding (however that capability is phrased) is one of promoting interaction and gaining knowledge of the ‘Other’ in other words, there is no deliberate move to develop attitudes within students that emphasise that cultural difference is the norm and not as a barrier to be overcome. To some degree, it could be argued that the Singaporean emphasis on creating a national identity in its curriculum documents is, in effect, another means of developing a transcultural attitude within its students. However, the constant theme in the Singaporean case is one of subsuming the existence of the different cultural identities in favour of the national identity, a belief that has been also apparent in other teacher-related research. The differences between different cultural groups are defined by ethnicity and the principle of the Singaporean curriculum appears to be more one of acknowledging the existence of different cultures but emphasising that they are not important considerations in the creation of a national Singaporean unified identity.

 reating and Assessing Transcultural Perspectives in Primary C Geography: An Australian Case Study The reality of global curriculum trends in schools is that the opportunities for Geography to be taught as a distinct discipline in primary schooling are extremely rare. As outlined earlier, the pressures for schools to find curriculum space for an increasing range of educational and social initiatives that society and governments have deflected onto primary schools has meant that principals have taken advantage of any possibility to consolidate learning areas with a school. For school principals who have the unenviable task of finding a solution to the curriculum dilemma, teaching Geography as part of an interdisciplinary Humanities course is a self-­ evident solution. Nevertheless, careful planning of primary curriculum can create strong geographical threads throughout all the years of learning that not only provides meaningful geographical educational experiences for the students but also uses those experiences to develop a `contemporary transcultural perspective. A perfect illustration of how such an approach can reap rewards can be seen in the case study of an Australian primary school, which exemplifies how ‘geocapabilities’, if not Geography itself, can be used to naturally enhance ‘the development of human potential and well-being both as individuals and as members of a society’ (Lambert et al. 2015, p. 724) as part of primary school education. This particular case study outlines how an outer suburban primary school in Melbourne, Australia (referred to here under the pseudonym of Forest Primary School), developed a global education program with a transcultural conceptual frame and a geographical context, working collaboratively with the author.

54

N. Casinader

Ironically, the geographical element was not a defined goal of the intervention, but the case illustrates that meaningful geographical education can still be incorporated into a school learning program even if the discipline itself is not featured in a school’s learning program. This can only occur, however, if the teaching team implementing such incorporations either possess strong geographic disciplinary expertise or have access to such specialised support, as was the case with Forest PS. As has been discussed earlier and elsewhere, it is only by focusing on the conceptual bases of disciplines that meaningful and intellectually sound integration can take place. That principle holds for all disciplines and learning areas, and not just those that – for right or wrong – are seen to be more significant areas of knowledge, such as Mathematics, English or Science. It is pertinent to note that the development of the transcultural, ‘geographical’ program at Forrest PS was not a new initiative as such. The school had already made the decision to incorporate a P-6 Global Education Program into its curriculum, which also had a very explicit inquiry-based learning approach. Located within a predominantly Anglo-European community, the principal of the school wished to extend the experience of the children at the school by opening up their learning to the wider issues of living within a global context, and in particular, of opening up their knowledge and understanding of cultural difference. The notion of developing cultural knowledge and awareness within students is also a mandated priority of the Victorian state curriculum variant of the Australian Curriculum, with the specification of teaching Intercultural Capability. To that end, the principal (who had also undertaken graduate studies on the impact of globalisation on educational policy and practice) had joined the school to an international network of government and independent schools, all of which have to be accredited for their guided adoption of a global-oriented school approach to education. The design and implementation of a common Global Education class was part of the school’s action plan in the adoption of its global framework. The subject is timetabled into every level of the Prep- Grade 6 primary curriculum so that each child attended one Global Education class for each week of their seven years at the school. It is staffed by a small, yet core, staff team that has responsibility for developing and implementing the Global Education program in line with the school’s inquiry learning philosophy, which is coordinated by the school’s staff-based curriculum committee. Consequently, the aim of the collaboration was not to build the program from scratch but to enhance it with a deliberately sequenced element in the teaching of cultural understanding. Whether intentional or not on the part of the school’s original designers of the Global Education Program, the very notion of global education and the development of global understanding is very much embedded in the disciplinary DNA of Geography (Demirci et al. 2018). The author has argued in a range of forums that Geography provides an ideal context for the teaching of cultural understanding in its transcultural construction (Casinader 2016; Casinader and Kidman 2018), arguing that the discipline’s form of inquiry facilitates transformative learning, built as it is on a dual focus on people and environments and the conceptual base of scale.

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

55

The structure of the global education program (GEP) that was developed as a result of the collaboration between the researcher and the school’s assigned teaching team is illustrated in Table 1. It has been edited to emphasise the themes within each stage of the program rather than the details specific to the school, which would not be readily understood by a global readership. However, in doing so, it contains sufficient school-specific information to highlight one of the key characteristics of any learning program in cultural understanding; that it needs to be highly contextualised to the school community in which it is being applied. Table 1  Global education program Component Conceptual Transitions Thinking Skills

Prep – Grade 2 Culture Multicultural Community Local Future Problem Solving Program Australia (FPS): Primary Programs (Stage 1)

Victorian Curriculum Intercultural Capability Civics & Citizenship

Forest PS Inquiry Curriculum (relevant elements)

Changed Annually

Grades 3–4 Intercultural Regional/National Future Problem Solving Program Australia: Primary Programs (Stage 1)

Grades 5–6 Transcultural Global Future Problem Solving Program Australia: Global Issues Problem Solving (GIPS) Community Problem Solving (CmPS) • Analysis: how & • Compare cultural • Experiencing why of cultural experiences different cultural difference • Reflecting on IC settings • Critical experiences • Lives of people • Cultural traditions perspectives of different • Ways of examining (Personal, group, cultures the cultural • Intercultural (IC) national) differences • How to encourage experiences ICU between people • Barriers to cultural • Cultural Diversity (CD) in • Democracy: rules & engagement • Rights & laws school & responsibilities in • Local government community Aust society (citizen) and community • Australian electoral • Groups in society: system who do I belong to? • Different views on democracy • Building a society through shared values Pre-Federation You must be Getting Along Australia as a Nation dreaming Healthy, Happy Economics Our place in the Safe Me Take Action World What I value Making Choices Then and Now Early Australian My Community. colonisation Our Community Africa/South America Shake it Off and (+ N America. Step Up Europe, Asia) (continued)

56

N. Casinader

Table 1 (continued) Component Conceptual Transitions School-Based Learning Experiences

Prep – Grade 2 Culture Multicultural Community Local 1. Knowledge of local and global places 2. Children and family life in different places 3. FPS: Primary Programs

Immersive External Learning Experiences

► Prep: Dora the Explorer plus others (ICT) ► Grade 1: Visit Islamic Museum ► Grade 2: Visit/ Explore Multicultural Market

Transitions of meaning: Key terms/ideas

Culture Society Rights Responsibility

Grades 3–4 Intercultural Regional/National 1. International Food/ Costume day, but centred on a project comparing different societies as communities (incl Australia) 2. Storytelling as a mirror of society 3. Artist-in-residence ► Grade 3: Indigenous Storytelling/Elder: respect talk) ► Grade 3: Koorie Heritage Walk ► Grade 4: CERES (African Option) + Werribee Zoo (African Safari) ► Grade 4 Camp: Sovereign Hill (Chinese activity) Culture Society Rights Responsibility

Grades 5–6 Transcultural Global 1. United Nations Model Conference 2. Decision-making across cultures and societies 3. FPS: CmPS Project (TBD) 4. FPS: Scenario Performance (link story to set topics through BPS Inquiry ► Grade 5: Port of Melbourne experience – economic/global connections ► Grade 6: Immigration Museum (Suitcase/ Museum) ► Grade 6: United Nations School-­ based Conference Culture Society Rights Responsibility

In the case of Forest Primary School, there were several important aspects to this context. The first of these was that the school’s family community was highly Anglo-European, with little daily experience of cultural diversity. The GEP, therefore, had to be more tempered in the implementation of its innovation in order to maintain parent support for what would be a very different kind of learning program for the community. The second context, however, helped to negate this, in that the principal and staff were highly thought of by the school community, which was reflected in the high degree of parent involvement in the life of the school, as well as the many positive and close relationships that the author observed between the teaching staff and the students whom they taught. The trust that the community had in the educational judgement of the principal and her staff, therefore, enabled a degree of adventure in the GEP that might have otherwise not been possible. The third context was that the GE had to incorporate the inquiry curriculum focus of the school, which included the annual specification of topics/themes that all learning areas had to incorporate into their teaching. These inquiry priorities change

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

57

each year, so the transcultural version of the GEP had to be flexible enough to respond to these annual variations. The fourth context was the school had already registered its students to participate in the Australian affiliate of the Future Problem Solving Program International, a non-profit international program that focuses on the development of individual and team critical, creative and problem-solving skills for P-12 school students, using the context of five global issues, the nature of which changes annually. The need for a more gradual building of transformative experiences was also aligned with the point made earlier in this chapter that transculturalism is not a total replacement of existing multicultural and intercultural approaches to cultural education. Instead, it builds on what has gone before in terms of multicultural and intercultural thinking. Consequently, the seven years of primary schooling were divided up into three stages of global education, each aiming to develop a more advanced form of cultural understanding that was based on what had been taught and learned previously. The conceptual structure of the GEP is shown in Table 1, represented as a progressive set of theoretical learning aims and outcomes over three stages. The conceptual progressions between the three stages took a number of forms, the first of which was in the nature of cultural education. In the first three years of primary school, (Grades Prep-2), the aim is for the children to develop a multicultural capability. Over the next two years (Grades 3–4), this multicultural understanding is developed into an intercultural capability. It is not until the last two years of primary school (Grades 5–6) that specific learning activities are put into place to specifically develop a more advanced transcultural perspective of understanding. Secondly, the GEP was constructed geographically around the concept of ‘place’, even though, once again, this is not specifically described as such in the school’s curriculum document. In the first ‘multicultural’ stage of learning, the contextual scale is that of the local community. In the second ‘intercultural’ stage, the scale focus shifts to that of the regional and/or national. It is only in the last ‘transcultural’ stage in Grades 5–6 that a global scale of study is the core of the GEP. The third progression, which incorporated the first two, was the constant use of a combination of school-based and external inquiry-based learning experiences to enact the learning sequence towards a transcultural capacity in global education (Table 1). Both sets of learning experiences utilised the school’s annual designated inquiry thematic emphases, as well as building on the relevant topics being used in the Future Problem Solving Program. The key aspect of these learning experiences, however, is that they emphasise the need to provide transformational conduits for students to gradually gain transcultural understandings by having their existing attitudes and opinions challenged. For that reason, the external experiences are referred to as immersive experiences, highlighting that they cannot be experiences that allow students to be passive observers or participants. One singular example of this form of experience, which ran the risk of parent rejection by the very nature of what was being challenged, was the incorporation of a culturally thought-provoking activity into each stage. In Stage One, a half-day visit to an Islamic museum (to be eventually translated into a half-day exchange with primary students from an Islamic

58

N. Casinader

school); in Stage Two, a walk around central Melbourne led by educators from the region’s Australian and Torres Strait Islander traditional owners; and in Stage Three, a United Nations conference simulation, run by an external United Nations organisation, that focuses on decision-making across cultures and societies. At the time of writing, the GEP is at the start of its fourth year of operation and has yet to reflect its fully transcultural form. Due to staff movements between schools, the GEP team is undergoing a period of renewal and the impacts of these changes have yet to be observed. As yet, there has been no formal evaluation of the program and its impact because it has not yet completed a full student cycle. Since it is essentially a seven-year program in attitudinal developments within children, it would be ill-founded to undertake such a formal assessment before the completion of one seven-year sequence. However, the comments by different members of the school community indicate that the new transcultural GEP is having a distinct impact on the attitudes of the students involved and their interactions with their parents and other members of the community. Discussions at school council meetings, where appropriate, have seen parents comment frequently on how children talk about the learning activities and experiences within the GEP in ways that are not replicated by other areas of the school’s learning program. Although there are no formal assessment items within the GEP itself, the teaching team have to report on the progress of their students as part of the school’s reporting cycle, including that of intercultural capability, as required by the administrators of the Victorian Curriculum. Anecdotally, they have reported frequent examples of progress that they have seen in individual students and families, especially in terms of their attitudes towards difference and their responses to the different learning activities. For instance, the first year in which the visit to an Islamic Museum took place found the staff apprehensive about the possible reaction of the parent body, but the principal reported that only one parent complaint was expressed verbally, and that it was a fellow parent who responded with the counterargument as part of the exchange. It appears, therefore, that a properly constructed, geographically based global education program that is focused more on teaching through formative and immersive learning experiences can have a very positive impact on a child’s education.

Afterthoughts From the pure geographer’s point of view, it would be much more preferable if global education programs such as the GEP outlined in this chapter could be seen both publicly and privately as uniquely geographical pieces of education. However, there are great dangers in disciplinary intransigence in attempting to move against policy and practice conventions that have persisted for some time. The example of Forest Primary School shows that interesting, influential and meaningful geographical education can take place within a primary school environment if it is placed

Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography

59

within the context of a much more widely accepted educational imperative, such as the teaching of cultural understanding. The case study of Forest Primary School also demonstrates that educational programs in intercultural understanding cannot be implemented through a series of one-off educational activities, such as International food days. Cultural understanding, as with any area of learning, requires a progressive curriculum with its own sequence of implementation if its aims are to be realised within students. This cannot take place without consideration for the context of the school and the community in which it operates. More than any other area of learning, the development of cultural understanding necessitates a shift in the attitudes of people, whether they are adults or primary students in the first years of their school education. An attitudinal shift takes time and cannot be condensed into a series of summative assessments that do not reflect the immersive nature of learning experiences that develop transcultural understanding through exposing children to challenging ideas that can be discussed and evolved gradually over seven years of primary education.

References Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2020) The Australian curriculum: geography. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, Sydney. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-­10-­curriculum/ humanities-­and-­social-­sciences/geography/ Casinader N (2016) A lost conduit for intercultural education: school geography and the potential for transformation in the Australian curriculum. Intercult Educ 27(3):257–273. https://doi. org/10.1080/14675986.2016.1150650 Casinader N (2020) Transnationalism and teacher capacity: professional readiness in the globalised age. Routledge, Abingdon Casinader N, Kidman G (2017) Fieldwork as a vehicle for sustainability education: the centrality of geographical inquiry. Paper presented at the 5th Education for Sustainability Asia conference Casinader N, Kidman G (2018) Geographical inquiry as a transcultural vehicle for education in sustainable development: the centrality of a new vision. Global Compar Educ, 2(2): 49–61 Chang C-H (2012) A critical discourse of Singapore’s school geography for the twenty-first century. Lit Inf Comput Educ J (LICEJ) 3(3):717–727 Coulby D (2006) Intercultural education: theory and practice. Intercult Educ 17(3):245–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980600840274 Demirci A, Miguel González R, Bednarz SW (2018) Geography education for global understanding, 1st edn. Springer, Cham Gundara JS, Portera A (2008) Theoretical reflections on intercultural education. Intercult Educ 19(6):463–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980802568244 Lambert D, Solem M, Tani S (2015) Achieving human potential through geography education: a capabilities approach to curriculum making in schools. Ann Assoc Am Geogr, 105(4): 723–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2015.1022128 Lähdemäki J (2019) Case study: the Finnish national curriculum 2016—a co-created national education policy. In: Cook JW (ed) Sustainability, human well-being, and the future of education. Springer, Cham, pp 397–422

60

N. Casinader

Tani S (2004) Curriculum reform and primary geography in Finland: a gap between theory and practice? Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 13(1):6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382040408668789 Tani S (2014) Geography in the Finnish school curriculum: part of the ‘success story’? Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 23(1):90–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2013.858457 Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (2020) Victorian curriculum: the humanities  – geography. Retrieved from http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/the-­humanities/ geography

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography Moritz Harder

Abstract  During recent decades, much research has been conducted on misconceptions and conceptual change in science education focusing on the physical environment. Only a part of this research refers to primary school settings. An even smaller amount of this covers pertinent questions about primary school students and their ideas about scientific concepts on geography-related topics. This chapter will summarise conceptual change theories and implications for a didactical perspective. Furthermore, there will be a brief review of the international literature on research concepts on geography-related topics. The chapter will end with insight from an empirical study of primary children’s conceptions about rivers. Keywords  Conceptual change · Conceptions · Primary geography · Rivers

Conceptual Change Theories The term “Conceptual Change” has its origins in the 1960s and is based on Kuhn (1967) and his “Structure of the Scientific Revolutions”. This work describes the course of the history of science marked by revolutionary paradigm shifts. In many cases, the transition from old scientific theories to new explanations does not occur through the further development of the paradigms. Instead, the changes are abrupt with a rapid revision of ideas. As an example, consider the change from classical physics to quantum physics or Einstein’s theory of relativity. Kuhn’s work provides the basis for the Conceptual Change Theory developed later in this chapter. But what is behind the term conceptual change? Schnotz (2006) interprets conceptual change as a re-learning process, which aims to change existing knowledge. The change can include not only individual concepts but entire knowledge structures. This statement gives an idea of the complexity of this approach and, at the same time, forms the basis for the different methods that have emerged throughout M. Harder (*) Institute of Primary Science and Social Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_5

61

62

M. Harder

research history. The field of research into conceptual change encompasses a wide range of explanatory approaches, some of which differ significantly in their basic assumptions and interpretations. According to Posner et al. (1982), the classical conceptual change theory refers to Kuhn’s principles of the scientific revolutions and links these to the terms assimilation and accommodation of Piaget (1929). Hewson (1981) offers the terms “conceptual capture” (assimilation) and “conceptual exchange” (accommodation) for better differentiation (cf. also Hewson and Thorley 1989). Assimilation is the weak variant of conceptual change when learners deal with new phenomena in their existing perceptions. If the existing ideas turn out to be inadequate in generating understanding, an exchange or a reorganisation of the respective ideas is necessary, what Posner et  al. call “accommodation”. To make radical changes in the way people perceive ideas, learners must be aware of their ideas. This requires four conditions (Posner et al. 1982). First, the learner must feel “dissatisfaction” with their existing ideas. New alternative concepts must be “intelligent” and show the learner inherent possibilities. At the same time, they must appear “plausible” and have the potential to solve the problems caused by their predecessor. As a final condition, a new concept must prove fruitful in the future and offer new possibilities for connecting to other areas of knowledge (Fig. 1). If the four conditions are not met in the order in which they are listed, the original concept will be retained. Posner et al. emphasise that the process of accommodation should not be over-simplified. Even if it is a radical change, this process does not have to be abrupt. Posner et al. assume that only certain aspects of the concept are accommodated at a certain point in time, especially in the case of complex topics. For novices, accommodation means a gradual adaptation of one’s concepts, which does not have to be linear but can also modify

Fig. 1  Posner et al. (1982) conceptual change model after Dole and Sinatra (1998)

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

63

other sub-concepts. Each adaptation lays the foundation for further adjustments and must eventually lead to a substantial reorganisation or a change of a central concept (Posner et al. 1982). From today’s perspective, the theory of Posner et al. is viewed critically (Treagust and Duit 2009). In particular, the approach according to which learning in a school context should be comparable with scientific theory or concepts should be completely replaced by scientific perspectives does not seem to be sustainable anymore. Studies show that conceptual change is in many cases only applied to marginal areas of existing concepts (Chinn and Brewer 1993). According to Chi et  al. (1994), the Conceptual Change Theory describes the process of conceptual change as the shifting of concepts from one ontological category to another (Chi and Roscoe 2002). Categorisation errors cause misconceptions. Chi and Roscoe (2002) distinguish between two forms of pre-conceptual knowledge. The naive prior knowledge, called preconceptions, can be easily changed using instructions. The robust previous knowledge and misconceptions prove to be very resistant to instructions and changes, e.g. “whales are a kind of fish”. Misconceptions are concepts that have been assigned to an incorrect or unsuitable ontological category like rivers are part of the “living” category. The challenge is determining the factors that inhibit or prevent a change in existing misconceptions. To create a deeper understanding of the content and facilitate subsequent learning, the naïve prior knowledge must be repaired. Chi et al. (1994) describe the repair of misconceptions as conceptual change and preconceptions as conceptual reorganisation. One criticism of the Conceptual Change Theory is that conceptions can resist instructions and changes (Stark 2003). In everyday life, contexts can be found in which misclassification is functionally meaningful “because it preserves the possibility of action despite a lack of prior knowledge” (Stark 2003, p. 135). Furthermore, to distinguish the ontological categories, e. g. the category “constraint-­ based interaction”, a certain degree of abstraction is required to make a conscious differentiation between the individual ontological categories. Previous assumptions on cognitive development give rise to doubts about whether the ability to abstract is already sufficiently developed in children at the primary school age (Hank 2013). Vosniadou’s (1994) theoretical approach assumes that the initial explanation models of the physical world are based on a coherent framework theory rather than a sum of individual fragments of knowledge. In a study with elementary school pupils on the earth’s shape, Vosniadou and Brewer (1992) show a hierarchically developing mental model in three stages (Fig.  2). Suppose mental models are

Fig. 2  Mental models of the earth after Vosniadou and Brewer (1992)

64

M. Harder

dependent on certain preconditions. In that case, initial models are formed early on by young children from their everyday experiences before they encounter the scientific model of a spherical earth. Children who have already been confronted with scientific information form “synthetic models”. These models represent a combination of the initial model and the scientific explanation. When the synthetic model is created, the information from the scientific model is integrated into existing knowledge structures, e. g. the hollow sphere model in which humans live on a flat surface within a hollow sphere. At the end of elementary school, most children seem to have generated the concept of a spherical earth as an astronomical object (Vosniadou 1994). The mental models are based on frame theories (ontological and epistemological presuppositions) and specific theories (possible explanations and predictions of certain phenomena). Vosniadou (1994) describes Conceptual Change as a gradual modification of mental models. This modification can be carried out either by enrichment or revision. In this case, enrichment means the additive extension of existing cognitive structures with new information. Vosniadou (1994) assumes that this conceptual change can be relatively simple and successful. A revision is required if the new information proves to be inconsistent with the existing structures. According to Vosniadou (1994), revising a specific theory is more straightforward than revising a framework theory since the structures of specific theories are not so profound. Even if the specific theory is based on a framework theory and the new information conflicts with the framework theory’s basic ontological and epistemological assumptions, a conceptual change is hardly possible. Because the fundamental ontological and epistemological assumptions of a framework theory form a coherent explanatory system that has proven itself in everyday situations over the years. They form the basis of knowledge, and a change would fundamentally affect all knowledge structures based on them (Vosniadou 1994). To accomplish a radical form of conceptual change, developing a metaconceptual awareness is crucial. The children must understand their basic assumptions and ideas as hypotheses that can be changed and falsified. In this way, misconceptions can be prevented from the simple enrichment of new information in connection with the existing ontological and basic epistemological assumptions, which manifest themselves as synthetic models (Vosniadou 1994, 2013; Vosniadou aand Ioannides 1998; Vosniadou et al. 2008). Vosniadou (1994, pp. 67 ff.) makes three suggestions, which may be helpful in the development of a meta-conceptual consciousness: • Children must be brought into situations where it is necessary to solve problems by observing, experimenting and testing hypotheses. • Children must be encouraged to verbalise explanations of phenomena and defend them against critical feedback. And they have also to be able to compare them with expert statements. • The mental models of children must be taken seriously. They must be given space to express them, to manipulate them and to be able to rework them successfully. The successful restructuring of a theory forms the basis on which meta-conceptual consciousness and the resulting cognitive flexibility can develop.

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

65

Caravita and Halldén’s (1994) conceptual change approach is not concerned with “right” or “wrong” concepts. Instead, the context in which concepts are used is crucial. Caravita and Halldén (1994) are concerned with breaking the metaphor of pupils as scientists that developed in educational research. After all, science in schools and science can differ considerably. The researcher determines their research field and the aims, methods, and theoretical reference frame in the scientific environment. In contrast, in the school environment, the topic to be dealt with and the limits within which the examination of the chosen topic takes place are set by the teacher. While a scientist makes assumptions about unproven theories and can be right or wrong, students work within limits set by the teacher. In contrast to scientists, the teacher determines the outcome of the scientific examination of a particular topic. Moreover, according to Caravita and Halldén (1994), knowledge cannot be isolated from the process in which it was generated. In a learning situation, such as school lessons, students are expected to interpret the situation according to their scientific context (“empirical context”), i.e. students should observe only specific components of a situation relevant to the theoretical framework to be considered. However, this is different from aspects of everyday life (“practical context”) that determine and guide our actions in the world. Figure 3 shows different contexts of interpretation using the example of earthquakes (after Reinfried 2010). In the scientific context, the phenomenon is described and investigated based on empirical data, e.g., the location of the hypo- and epicentre or the damage to the infrastructure. Only those aspects of a phenomenon compatible with the basis of the current scientific consensus and its theories, such as plate tectonics, are investigated (Reinfried 2010). The same phenomenon is explained in the everyday context based on individual perceptions and interpreted, for example, as a magical phenomenon. The variations in the different conceptual change approaches are based on decisive factors for changing concepts. Rational and logical considerations (Posner et al. 1982) are “cold” conceptual change factors. This is contrasted with affective aspects such as motivation and interest, which are equally important and decisive in changing concepts in “hot” conceptual change factors (Pintrich et al. 1993). In addition to cognitive processes, which describe intraindividual processes, the context in which changes in conceptions occur plays a significant role (Caravita and Halldén 1994). A situational dependency in the change process also involves accepting processes outside the individual and thus includes social processes. However, the versatility of the conceptual change approaches outlined here reveals two fundamental approaches that differ significantly in their paradigmatic structures. The conceptualisation of conceptual change is based on cognitivist paradigms on the one hand and situationist paradigms on the other hand (Stark 2002). Even if there is already a broad spectrum of priorities and partially divergent positions within the opposing positions, the existing difference between these two competing approaches is so significant due to their paradigmatic basis that the integration or even replacement of the cognitivist paradigm by the situationist is highly unlikely (Stark 2002). Stark (2002) assumes that the two approaches coexist side by side. He sees a solution to the further development of conceptual change in viewing the situationist

66

M. Harder

Fig. 3  Interpretation contexts of earthquakes (after Reinfried 2010) based on the context model from Caravita and Halldén (1994)

perspective as a meta-perspective or enriching the cognitivist approaches with situationist elements. Thus, according to Stark, the applicability of cognitive approaches could be strengthened, and at the same time, their empirical precision could be maintained. The spectrum of conceptual change theories shows no precise explanatory approaches that can provide comprehensive answers without paradigmatically delimiting framework structures. Instead, individual ideas can only reveal explanatory patterns within specific domains. No particular framework offers an explanatory model for the development and change of geographic conceptions under the premise of conceptual change. However, geography can benefit from the research results of other disciplines (Reinfried 2010). The following points can serve as a basis for this: • The theory of conceptual change considers learning based on the constructivist paradigm as a change and development of subjective ideas. The degree of change in presentation ranges from weak partial changes and restructuring to strong changes or new construction of ideas. In changing attitudes, motivational and situational factors play a role in addition to cognitive factors.

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

67

–– Cognitive factors include, for example, the ability to perceive and solve problems. –– Motivation factors include, for example, the reasons why learners decide to work on tasks on the one hand and, on the other hand, what expectations learners have of a learning situation. –– The context in which ideas are applied and developed plays an important role. • Perceptions are subjective mental constructs that can encompass entire knowledge structures. They can neither be passed on nor accepted. Conceptions can only be mentally formed, changed and reorganised in the context of existing conceptions. • The conceptual change approach in relation to the school context often means that learners are confronted with a conflict between their everyday and scientific concepts. One possibility is the gradual development from the students‘ performances to the scientific explanation. According to Brown and Clement (1989), the student conceptions are used to develop a bridging strategy using analogies, which is supportively effective and thus offers a way of approaching the scientific conception step by step. Another possibility for the continuous development of the conception is the reinterpretation of pre-course conceptions (Jung 1986). The aim is to find aspects in student conceptions that provide valid connecting points for the re-interpretation of pre-school conceptions from a scientific point of view. In summary, the continuous change of conception might be an evolutionary process. It is essential to use the existing conceptions as a positive starting point and develop them further. It is not a question of identifying deficits but finding and using connections. Duit (1996) assumes a difference between the students‘ concepts and the scientific concepts for the discontinuous path to exist. To overcome this conceptual difference, the term a cognitive conflict was coined (Scott et al. 1992), based on Piaget’s theory of equilibration. According to this theory, a mental imbalance is followed by an interplay between assimilation and accommodation until a balance is restored. Duit (1996) names three primary forms of cognitive conflict. • Generate a cognitive conflict by comparing student predictions and the results of an experiment. • The conflict between the concepts of students and those of teachers. • The conflict between the concepts of each student The crucial point in the strategic use of cognitive conflict is that students must be aware of the conflict. The perception of the discrepancy between the different conceptions from a student‘s or teacher’s perspective can differ significantly. Where teachers see conflicting concepts, the students might not notice any difference (Duit 1996). From the learners’ perspective, an intentional confrontation with the conflict-­ causing anomalous data must occur to overcome this discrepancy. A study by Chinn and Brewer (1993) shows how learners deal with anomalous data. According to Chinn and Brewer (1993), the study results show how vital the reaction of learners to anomalous data is for explaining the process of conceptual change. The authors

68

M. Harder

Fig. 4 The learners’ reactions to abnormal data from Chinn and Brewer (1993). (After Schmeinck 2007)

identify seven possible responses to anomalous data (Fig. 4). For the possibilities of the learner response, the study shows: • • • • • • •

Ignoring the abnormal data Rejecting the abnormal data The exclusion of the abnormal data The clarification of the anomalous data is postponed The anomalous data is reinterpreted Marginal areas of the theory are changed A new theory is developing

These reactions are influenced by the quality of pre-knowledge that learners bring to confront anomalous data. Chinn and Brewer (1993) identified four factors: defending established theories, ontological beliefs, epistemological confessions, and background knowledge. Learners tend to defend well-established theories, which complicates the change of those theories. Ontological beliefs reinforce this effect and support the preservation of theory. Epistemological confessions can promote or hinder changes in theory. The belief that science consists of the memory of facts can restrict the modification of existing theories, while the understanding of consistency can be beneficial. Existing background knowledge also has an ambivalent effect on change processes and ultimately depends on its specific content. Chinn and Brewer (1993) also cited two decisive factors of a new theory’s characteristics to facilitate change. The availability of a plausible alternative theory and its quality in terms of accuracy and consistency play a decisive role in promoting theory changes. The characteristics of the anomalous data itself influence the individual

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

69

reactions of learners to this data. The credibility of the occurring data counteracts a rejection in a positive way. The more unambiguous the data is, the less likely it is that the information available will be reinterpreted. In addition, a variety of information sources can counteract the rejection and reinterpretation of anomalous data. The final factor cited by Chinn and Brewer (1993) is a processing strategy that requires a deeper examination of the data. On the one hand, the encouragement of personal involvement of learners should be strengthened. On the other hand, it should be ensured that learners must provide intentional justification of their reasons for or against a theory.

Didactical Implications For the perspective of constructivist science didactics, Gropengießer (1997) summarizes the findings of Aufschnaiter et al. (1992), Glasersfeld (1992), Duit (1996) and Roth (1997). In this context, conceptions are processes in the brain and thus represent subjective constructs. The quote “The environment we perceive is our invention” (Foerster 1985, p. 25) suggests that any conception that people use to explain their environment is constructed intra-individually. Under this premise, no conceptions can be passed on or taken up in a learning situation. However, mediation is still possible through communicative and factual means. Both forms of presentation are used in teaching. Communication makes it possible to express conceptions in verbal or non-verbal signs on the one hand, and on the other hand, it makes it possible to assign meaning to the voiced characters. By referencing facts, meaning should be created to derive conceptions of all levels of complexity. According to Gropengießer (1997), separating the two forms of presentation in class is impossible. Words unfold their meaningfulness only in the context of experiences and facts and understand themselves only as hints or signposts for developing conceptions. Learners can only change conceptions in the context of their existing conceptions. “The most important factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows” (Ausubel et al. 1968). Thus, the already existing conceptions of learners move into the field of observation. The bibliography of Pfundt and Duit (1991), or Duit (2009), shows impressively how this understanding of conceptions has influenced the understanding of teaching and learning in didactic research. Gropengießer (1997, p. 27) summarises the constructivist didactic view as follows: • Conceptions are subjective mental processes but not substances. • Conceptions can neither be passed on nor accepted, but they can be communicated in two basic ways: via sign systems and facts. • Conceptions can be mentally formed, changed and reorganised in the context of the already available conceptions. With a comprehensive view of constructivism, Duit (1996) identifies four main aspects for constructing knowledge. –– Active construction: The students‘ conceptions are actively constructed based on existing conceptions.

70

M. Harder

Arcles about geoscienfically concepons Cryosphere

1%

Pedosphere

2%

Biosphere

2%

System Earth

4%

Hydrosphere

12%

Atmosphere

17%

Lithosphere

24%

Astronomy

29% 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Fig. 5  Articles about geo-scientific conceptions from the LLBG-Bibliography. (After Reinfried and Schuler 2009, p. 127).

–– Preliminary construction: Our conceptions about events or other people’s thoughts have a provisional and hypothetical character. –– Viability: Constructed conceptions must be viable, i.e. they must prove useful to those who think them. –– Social construction: Although every individual must construct their conceptions, this happens in a social context (Fig. 5).

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography Research on students‘ conceptual change and fundamental conceptions has been carried out in science education for more than 30 years. In the STCSE bibliography1 of Duit (2009), more than 8400 articles from this field of research were collected. Most of the articles deal with scientific topics focusing on physics. The proportion of geographic content is deficient. For this reason, the LLBG bibliography2 was founded by Reinfried and Schuler (2009). The bibliography contains 604 articles (status 2011) dealing with geoscientific conceptions in a broader context. Figure 5 shows the distribution of the empirical studies (N = 317) in the geosciences. Almost a third of the articles deal with astronomical topics. Studies on conceptual change in anthropogeography are still more on the marginal side. Articles dealing with topics in primary school are only a tiny part of the bibliography. This shows that there is even less research on conceptual change in the primary sector than in geography. The interdisciplinary nature of geography also makes literature research complex, as the research work is spread across many  Students’ and Teachers’ Conceptions and Science Education.  Ludwigsburg-Lucerne Bibliography on Conceptual Change Research in the Geosciences.

1 2

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

71

disciplines (cf. Reinfried and Schuler 2009). Reinfried (2010) sees challenges and needs in the didactic conceptual changer research in the theoretical, methodical and practical area, which is still valid seven years later. In the next section, the results of an empirical study on students‘ perceptions of rivers are presented in further detail for a more illustrative purpose.

Results of a Study on Student Conceptions About Rivers Harder (2017) explores the following five questions of investigation in an interview study on student conceptions of the natural phenomenon of a river: Which conceptions of rivers from a geomorphological, hydrological and anthropogenic perspective can be derived from interviews with primary students? How do conceptions about rivers differ between children with different spatial access to rivers? How consistent are the conceptions about rivers over time? What changes can be observed after an intervention? And what structures can be found in these conceptions? With the help of self-painted pictures and problem-centred interviews, child statements were collected that were prepared and evaluated based on qualitative content analysis. Overall, results were derived from data from 105 interviews with 61 children. It can be seen that the conceptions of rivers are diverse and cover a broad spectrum which, on the one hand, overlaps with the results of literature on children’s conceptions of rivers in some aspects and, on the other hand, reveals further aspects of conceptions about rivers, like a circular river course. There are also differences between children’s concepts of a river depending upon where they live. In the following sections, I describe my earlier work exploring ‘river’ conceptions by children in Cologne and Kiel (in Northern Germany). The cause of this difference can be traced back to the children’s differing access to rivers. The challenge is to develop a teaching approach to the phenomenon of rivers, which supports the children in forming coherent and structured conceptions that enable an intentional change of the mental area.

Conceptions About Rivers In my recent study, 105 interviews were conducted, and the transcripts were encoded into 169 categories, then grouped into eight main categories (cf. Table 1). The distribution of the frequency of codings per category (Fig. 6), the majority (120) of the categories have only one to ten encodings and are thus only derived from a small proportion of the interviews. In addition, the number of categories with more frequent coding is also declining sharply. Categories with 11 to 20 codings fall well behind with a frequency of 25. Ten categories had 21 to 30 encodings, and six had 31 to 40 encodings. Eight categories had encodings between 40 and 74. The

72

M. Harder

Table 1  Most common subcategories of the eight main categories Category River shape  Various shapes  River differences  Size/shape River formation  Rain  Structure – people  Erosion Rivers changing  People  Shape/course  Pollution  Water-level  Erosion  Flood/high tide Course of the river  Linear  Circular River water  Change of current direction not possible  Cause – downhill  Cause – current Change of current direction possible  Cause – wind Origin of river water  Rain  Sea People and river  Drinking water  Recreational activities

Frequency

Percentage

55

52

73

70

48 36 29

46 34 28

74 71 33 32 32 31

70 68 31 30 30 30

92 18

88 17

39 24

37 23

28

27

42 20

40 19

58 53

55 50

distribution of categories in terms of the frequency of encodings shows a substantial shift towards categories with few encodings. This means that conceptions of the natural phenomenon of a ‘river’ are expansive in the context of the eight main categories. Therefore, an actual saturation of children’s conceptions is unlikely to be achieved. This means that an assumed saturation of the content of the subcategories is probably not possible with open coding of the individual child statements, why one can only speak of a theoretical saturation in qualitative approaches. In contrast to this, however, it is evident that it has been possible to derive concepts from the data shared by several children and thus allow

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

73

Fig. 6  Number of category-related codings per category (N = 169). (Harder 2017) Table 2  Frequency of the subcategory “Course of the river – linear” Course of the river – linear Sea – sea Spring – sea Mountain – sea Lake – sea Ground – ground Structure – structure Ground – sea Lake – lake

Frequency 26 22 14 14 11 8 8 8

Percentage 25 21 13 13 10 8 8 8

an insight beyond the individual perspective into the children’s interindividual mental similarities. Table 1 shows an overview of the most common subcategories in the eight contextualising main categories. Nearly 88% of the interviews contain concepts that assume a linear river course. This subcategory summarises conceptions that connect the course of a river with a beginning and an end. It is not always clear what the beginning and what the end is. In any case, the river is limited at both sides and thus described as finite in its course. The spectrum of concepts that delimit a river is very broadly diversified (Table 2 and Fig. 7).

74

M. Harder

Fig. 7 (a) structure – structure, (b) ground – sea, (c) mountain – sea, (d) ground – ground, (e) sea – sea, (f) lake – lake, (g) spring – sea, (h) lake – sea. (Harder 2017) Table 3  Regional frequency of the meta-category “Rivers as surface runoff” Rivers as surface runoff Spring – sea Sea – mountain Spring – lake Creek – river – lake Creek – river – sea Mountain – lake Codings (valid)

Cologne (coding) 14 11 2 1 1 1 25

Cologne (per cent) 21 16 3 1 1 1 37

Kiel (coding) 8 3 3 0 0 0 10

Kiel (per cent) 21 8 8 0 0 0 26

The results show that the allegedly trivial course of a river from a source to a mouth (usually to the sea) cannot be assumed as presupposed knowledge. The subcategories can be broadly grouped into the meta-categories “rivers as a connection between waterbodies” and “rivers as surface runoff” (cf. Tables 3 and 4). In 17% of the interviews, some ideas describe the course of a river as a cycle, e.g. a river flows from the sea in a loop back into the same sea.

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

75

Table 4  Regional frequency of the meta-category “Rivers as a connection between waterbodies” Rivers as a connection between waterbodies Sea – sea Lake – sea Lake – lake Codings (valid)

Cologne (coding) 16 5 1 19

Cologne (per cent) 24 7 1 28

Kiel (coding) 10 9 7 18

Kiel (per cent) 26 24 18 47

Regional Differences in Student Conceptions About Rivers Using the two derived meta-categories, “rivers as surface runoff” and “rivers as a link between water bodies”, a regional difference between the two samples of the study can be demonstrated. Table  3 shows the percentage distribution of the six subcategories of the meta-category “rivers as surface runoff” based on the documents valid at the Cologne and Kiel survey sites. There is a tendency that in the interviews of the Cologne sample, this conception of a river with 37% was derived somewhat more frequently than at the second place Kiel with 26%. If you look at the regional distribution of the meta-category “rivers as a link between water bodies” in Table 4, there is a somewhat more pronounced tendency in the percentage appearance of the concept between the interviews of the two samples. At the Kiel site of the survey, 47% of interviews provide this concept. Only 28% of the interviews in the Cologne sample contain statements from which a derivation is possible. In summary, there are differences in the conceptions of the Cologne and Kiel sample. Qualitative explanatory approaches can be derived from the differences, which explain the influence of the children’s living environment on the concepts of phenomena. In addition, in the Cologne sample, the flood water as a river-changing cause is frequent, which could be attributed to observations or perceptions from the media and social environment of possible Rhine floods. In their studies, similar results are also found by Broadstock (1993) and Wilson and Goodwin (1981), although there is no justification for their assumptions based on empirical data.

On the Structure of Student Conceptions About Rivers The river conceptions show a structural similarity among the participating children. In the different aspects of rivers, children’s ideas can be described as an implicit hypothesis rather than a concrete stable (miss)concept. The children’s conceptions have a hypothetical character. However, an explicit description in the subjunctive is not always given. An explanation for this kind of “uncertain” concept could be found in the lack of coherence of the involved elements of the mental area, which

76

M. Harder

Fig. 8  Hypothetical model for the description of initial verbalized concepts. (Harder 2017)

would suggest an initial intentional examination of the subject of rivers.3 Figure 8 shows a hypothetical model for ad-hoc construction and a description of initial verbalised conceptions. After a linguistic stimulus, which can be internal (in the form of self-stimulation) and external, mental fragments of observations, experiences and knowledge are used and linked. In this model, this process is called hypothesising in the linguistic field, which ultimately forms an ad hoc construction of a verbalised concept. This model can be used to explain the genesis of verbalised conceptions.

About Constancy of Conceptions Studies on student conceptions that make statements about processes of change, stability or constancy of concepts about geographical phenomena are rare (Reinfried 2010). Considering the temporal constancy of children’s ideas, this study shows that the concepts about rivers on an individual level are subject to strong variations in content, which can be traced back to less structured concepts. In the Cologne sample, for example, only 7% of the cases show conceptions that have remained constant over a period of one year. In addition, there are also aspects in the individual conceptions, such as factors of the formation of rivers that can be described as constant over a period of one year, but there are other aspects to the same perspective that either no longer occurs or appear for the first time. However, in about half of the possible cases, there is no constancy. Considering the constancy on a  This observation is also reflected in diSessa’s (1988) conceptual change approach. In his “Knowlegde-in-pieces” theory, increasing coherence in the conceptions describes the development of a novice to an expert. 3

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

77

categorical level, a similar picture emerges. Thus, a constancy can only be found in the unspecific concept of the differentiation of rivers based on their shape. From the results of this study, it can be deduced that there is only very little constancy in the children’s conceptions about the natural phenomenon river.

 onclusions for Supporting Conceptual Change C in Primary Geography The lack of coherence in the students’ concepts can play a significant role in geographic phenomena, especially when it comes to initial learning (Harder 2017). It is possible that for some children, the study of geographical phenomena in primary school education is a first intentional encounter, beyond their everyday experiences, with a particular phenomenon. While in school, intentionality is a fundamental characteristic of teaching and the context of contemplation is determined by the teacher, a possible encounter of the children in everyday life with a certain (geographic) phenomenon may neither happen intentionally nor in a (geo)scientific context. Lack of intentionality and context can explain why some students’ conceptions show little coherence. The aim of the teaching approach should therefore be to support the development of mental coherence. As an implication for geography teaching in primary schools, one could fall back on structuring aids for teaching which, according to Jonen et al. (2003, p. 106) and Möller et al. (2011), have a supportive effect on coherence formation. This can be illustrated, for example, by scaffolding, which has proven to be a valuable structuring aid in science education (Kleickmann et al. 2010). In addition, an encounter with the natural phenomenon in extracurricular places of learning, as suggested by Mackintosh (2004), could also be helpful in the formation of ideas through observation and physical experiences. Research is needed in the evaluation of methodological approaches to support the conceptual change of geographical content.

References Aufschnaiter Sv, Fischer HE, Schwedes H (1992) Kinder konstruieren Welten: Perspektiven einer konstruktivistischen Physikdidaktik. In Kognition und Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft: Bd. 950. Suhrkamp, S. 380–424 Ausubel DP, Novak JD, Hanesian H (1968) Educational psychology: a cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart & Winston Broadstock MJ (1993) Children’s understanding of earth systems phenomena in Taiwan. In: von Novak J (ed) Proceedings of the third international seminar on misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics. Cornell University, Ithaca/New York. (distributed electronically) Brown DE, Clement J (1989) Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instr Sci 18(4):S. 237–261

78

M. Harder

Caravita S, Halldén O (1994) Re-framing the problem of conceptual change. Learn Instr 4(1):S. 89–111 Chi MT, Roscoe RD (2002) The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In: Limón M, Mason L (eds) Reconsidering conceptual change: issues in theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, S. 3-27 Chi MT, Slotta JD, De Leeuw N (1994) From things to processes: a theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learn Instr 4(1):S. 27–43 Chinn CA, Brewer WF (1993) The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: a theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Rev Educ Res 63(1):S. 1–49 diSessa AA (1988) Knowledge in pieces. In: von Forman G, Pufall P (eds) Constructivism in the computer age, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum, S. 49–70 Dole JA, Sinatra GM (1998) Reconceptalizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educ Psychol 33(2–3):S. 109–128 Duit R (1996) The constructivist view in science education. What it has to offer and what should not be expected from it. Investigaçôes em ensino de ciências 1(1):S. 40–75 Duit R (2009) Bibliography STCSE: students’ and teachers’ conceptions and science education. University of Kiel, Kiel Foerster H (1985) Sicht und Einsicht: Versuche zu einer operativen Erkenntnistheorie. Wissenschaftstheorie, Wissenschaft und Philosophie 21. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag. GDSU, Ed. (2013). Perspektivrahmen Sachunterricht. Klinkhardt Glasersfeld Ev (1992) Wissen, Sprache und Wirklichkeit: Arbeiten zum radikalen Konstruktivismus. Wissenschaftstheorie, Wissenschaft und Philosophie. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag Gropengießer H (1997) Didaktische Rekonstruktion des Sehens – Wissenschaftliche Theorien und die SIcht der Schüler in der Perspektive der Vermittlung. Ed. von U. Kattmann, B. Moschner & I.  Parchmann. Bd. 1. Beiträge zu Didaktischen Rekonstruktion. Didaktisches Zentrum Universität Oldenburg Hank B (2013) Konzeptwandelprozesse im Anfangsunterricht Chemie: Eine quasiexperimentelle Längsschnittstudie. In: von Niedderer H, Fischler H, Sumfleth E (eds) Studien Zum Physikund Chemielernen. Logos Verlag, Berlin, p 155 Harder M (2017) Entweder sind die durch Zufall entstanden oder Gott hatte seine Finger im Spiel Eine Interviewstudie zu Kindervorstellungen über das Naturphänomen Fluss im Kontext des Conceptual Change. (in press) Hewson PW (1981) A conceptual change approach to learning science. Eur J Sci Educ 3(4):S. 383–396 Hewson P, Thorley NR (1989) The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. Int J Sci Educ 11:S. 541–553 Jonen A, Möller K, Hardy I (2003) Lernen als Veränderung von Konzepten – am Beispiel einer Untersuchung zum naturwissenschaftlichen Lernen in der Grundschule. In: von Cech D, Schwier H-J (eds) Lemwege und Aneignungsforrnen im Sachunterrich. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn, S. 93–108 Jung W (1986) Alltagsvorstellungen und das Lernen von Physik und Chemie. NaturwissenschaftenPhysik/Chemie 34:S. 2–6 Kleickmann T, Vehmeyer J, Möller K (2010) Zusammenhänge zwischen Lehrervorstellungen und kognitivem Strukturieren im Unterricht am Beispiel von Scaffolding-Maßnahmen. Unterrichtswissenschaft 38(3):S. 210–228 Kuhn TS (1967) Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen. Bd. 2. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt aM Mackintosh M (2004) Children’s understanding of rivers: is there need for more constructivist research in primary geography? In: von Catling S, Martin F (eds) Researching primary geography. Register of Research in Primary Geography, London, Kap. 55–63 Möller K, Jonen A, Hardy I, Stern E (2011) Die Förderung von naturwissenschaftlichem Verständnis bei Grundschulkindern durch Strukturierung der Lernumgebung. In: von Prenzel M, Doll J (eds) Bildungsqualität von Schule: Schulische und außerschulische Bedingungen

Conceptual Change and Primary Geography

79

mathematischer, naturwissenschaftlicher und überfachlicher Kompetenzen. Beltz Verlag, Weinheim und Basel, p S. 176–191 Pfundt H, Duit R (1991) Bibliography. Students’ alternative frameworks and science education. IPN, Kiel Piaget J (1929) Child’s conception of the world. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London Pintrich PR, Marx RW, Boyle RA (1993) Beyond cold conceptual change: the role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Rev Educ Res 63(2):S. 167–1999 Posner GJ, Strike KA, Hewson PW, Gertzog WA (1982) Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci Educ 66(2):S. 211–227 Reinfried S (2010) Lernen als Vorstellungsänderung: Aspekte der Vorstellung mit Bezügen zur Geographiedidaktik. In: von Reinfried S (ed) Schülervorstellungen und geographisches Lernen  – Aktuelle Conceptual-Change-Forschung und Stand der theoretischen Diskussion. Logos, Berlin, S. 1–32 Reinfried S., Schuler, S (2009) Die Ludwigsburg-Luzerner Bibliographie zur Alltagsvorstellungsforschung Roth G (1997) Das Gehirn und seine Wirklichkeit: kognitive Neurobiologie und ihre philosophischen Konsequenzen. Suhrkamp Taschenbuch. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp Schmeinck D (2007) Wie Kinder die Welt sehen: eine empirische Ländervergleichsstudie zur räumlichen Vorstellung von Grundschulkindern. Klinkhardt Schnotz W (2006) Conceptual change. In: Rost D (ed) Handwörterbuch pädagogische Psychologie. Beltz, PVU, Weinheim, S. 77–82 Scott P, Asoko H, Driver R (1992) Teaching for conceptual change: a review of strategies. In: von Duit R, Goldberg F, Niedderer H (eds) Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical studies. IPN at the University of Kiel, Kiel, S. 310–329 Stark R (2002) Conceptual Change: kognitivistisch oder kontextualistisch? Forschungsbericht 149. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Lehrstuhl für Empirische Pädagogik und Pädagogische Psychologie, München Stark R (2003) Conceptual Change: kognitiv oder situiert? Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 17(2):S. 133–144 Treagust D, Duit R (2009) Multiple perspectives of conceptual change in science and the challenges ahead. J Sci Math Educ Southeast Asia 32(2):S. 89–104 Vosniadou S (1994) „Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change“. Learn Instr 4(1):S. 45–69 Vosniadou S (2013) Conceptual change in learning an instruction. In: von Stella V (ed) International handbook of research on conceptual change, Kap. 1, 2. Aufl. Routledge, New York, London, S. 11–30 Vosniadou S, Brewer WF (1992) Mental models of the earth: a study of conceptual change in childhood. Cogn Psychol 24(4):S. 535–585 Vosniadou S, Ioannides C (1998) From conceptual development to science education: a psychological point of view. Int J Sci Educ 20(10):S. 1213–1230 Vosniadou S, Vamvakoussi X, Skopeliti I (2008) The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In: von Stella V (ed) International handbook of research on conceptual change. Routledge, New York/London, S. 3–34 Wilson P, Goodwin M (1981) „How do twelve and ten-year-old students perceive rivers?“ Geogr Educ 4:S. 5–16

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions Gillian Kidman

Abstract  Primary classrooms provide the learnings in Geography that are the foundation for geographical learnings in the secondary classroom. This chapter concerns the nature of student-generated questions in the Geography lessons of primary classrooms in Australia. The typology of student-generated questions provided in this chapter indicates the need for teachers to provide opportunities for students to discuss their ideas in small groups as well as a whole class. These discussions must encourage the students to question their learnings. This chapter provides an insight into the nature of questioning in the primary Geography classroom  – giving a voice to the student. A major conclusion is that student-­ generated questions and natural discourse concerning geographical concepts and ideas should be included in all primary classrooms as the thinking skills enhanced through student-generated questioning is likely to be transferable to other learning areas. Keywords  Questions · Student-generated questions · Geography · Primary school

Introduction Through the formal study of Geography in schools, students learn to use analytical tools to recognize and apply spatial relationships in the world around them, thus developing a sense of causal relations between geographical phenomena as they study the spatial distribution of organisms (biogeography) through chorological relationships. Geography endeavours to achieve an integrated understanding of its content by drawing on knowledge from the sciences, the social sciences and the humanities. “This assists cross-disciplinary learning and helps students recognise the connections between geography and more specialised subjects they may be

G. Kidman (*) Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_6

81

82

G. Kidman

studying” (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) 2011, 5). Gregg and Leinhardt (1993) informed us that over time, a geographical education provides the student the opportunity to develop a geographic perspective (the ability to describe, explain, and predict phenomena and processes in terms of distribution, context, and scale). The student can also develop geographic reasoning (using their geographical perspective as a tool for organizing knowledge in other disciplines such as history, geology, or anthropology to produce knowledge about the spatial aspects of some other discipline). Such learning is still relevant today, but I consider the learning to be combined - a geographic perspective and geographic reasoning combines to become key components of a student’s geographical literacy. This chapter considers student-generated questions as a component of geographic reasoning – a necessary ingredient to geographical literacy. It is a comparative chapter, exploring the nature of geographical student-generated questions in two age groups within primary school Geography – Year 2 and Year 6, from the Australian state of Queensland. Specifically, I was interested in exploring the following research question: In what ways are the typologies of student-generated questions from primary school Geography learnings influenced by age/academic progress?

Primary School Geography and Approaches to Questioning Before I review the literature surrounding the topic of student-generated questions, I first define Australian school Geography as provided in the Shape papers of the Australian Curriculum – the learning framework on which Australian school education is based: Geography is the investigation and understanding of the earth and its features and the distribution of life on earth, including human life and its impacts. It is the study of the many different “places”, or environments, which make up our world and is described as “the why of where” … Geography answers our questions about why places have their particular environmental and human characteristics; how and why these characteristics vary from place to place; how places are connected, and how and why they are changing. Geography examines these questions on all scales, from the local to the global, and over time periods that range from a few years to thousands of years (ACARA 2011, 3).

Of particular interest to this chapter is that the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) defines Geography as incorporating the idea of questions. Geography answers and examines questions. Geographical Inquiry (see Chapter 7) encourages the student to ask geographical questions – an aim of the Australian Curriculum: Geography. Geographical inquiry begins with a ‘why’ question. There is often also a ‘where’ and ‘why there’ question about location. Following the ‘why’ questions, there will also be ‘so what’ questions about consequences, ‘what ought’ questions about what should happen, ‘what might happen’ questions about the future, and ‘what if ’ questions about alternatives (ACARA 2011, 19). A summary of the cognitive verbs (see Fig.  1) that are mandated in the Australian

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions

83

Fig. 1  Cognitive verbs relating to student-generated questions

Curriculum for Geography reveals that a developmental approach exists within the Inquiry Skill strand, and within the Questioning sub-strand: We can see that in the primary school setting (Foundation (5 years of age) to Year 6 (12 years of age)), students are required to pose and develop appropriate questions. The teacher needs to recognise the implied developmental nature of Geographical questioning in primary school. Contrast this implied nature of questioning in Geography with History’s explicit statement that questioning ability is influenced by increasing expertise. In Australia, Geography and History share an integrated curriculum housed under the banner of “Humanities”. Questioning in the Humanities is interesting – it starts with the younger primary student posing questions, and it is in the upper primary school that students are to develop and possibly construct questions. ACARA’s associated glossary does not define ‘develop’ or ‘construct’, although it defines ‘pose’ as ‘putting forward for consideration’ (ACARA 2015). Kidman and Casinader (2017) turned to the Oxford Dictionary and interpreted the terms ‘develop’ and ‘construct’ as follows: Develop – to become more mature, therefore the Humanities see this age group as being able to respond to greater intellectual sophistication in terms of questioning in the upper primary school; and construct - to form by bringing together conceptual elements (p. 78).

These definitions indicate a consideration of relationships becomes an important component of a question in lower secondary schooling, implying that the development of questioning skills in the primary years needs to facilitate this increasing intellectual sophistication. The remainder of this chapter is concerned with the nature of the questions that students ask as they undertake studies in Geography in the primary school. In previous writings (Kidman and Casinader 2017), I outlined the difference that exists in the typology of questions students ask between the Geography, Science and History disciplines. I argued that the writers of the Australian Curriculum facilitated a form of epistemological identity awareness of the disciplinary difference in the students. In this current chapter, I focus upon the increasing intellectual sophistication evident from the typology of questions asked by students in Geography in primary school. The cognitive verb usage in the Australian curriculum documents appears to

84

G. Kidman

enable this. Chin and Brown (2002) suggested that questioning ability when undertaking research activities, like geographical inquiries, might depend upon hypothetico-deductive reasoning ability, rather than upon the various types of formal operational thought. The following section briefly considers the nature of student-­ generated questions.

Student-Generated Questions Being able to ask and answer questions is an important skill for talking and reasoning effectively in small group situations, especially when undertaking inquiry-based learning. When a student is able to interact with others in a shared discourse, the vocabulary and the creativity of those participating in the discourse increases (Mercer 1996). During geographical discussions, the student justifies his/her ideas, and clarifies meanings resulting in a cognitive re-examination of, and a reorganisation of, understandings. The student develops a better understanding of the problem than they had previously, and this has a positive effect on their learning performance (Gillies 2003). Questioning pushes the discourse and learning forward (Resendes 2014); factual questions (for example, who, what, where, and when) increase reasoning. Explanatory questions (for example, why or how a directional compass works) push the learning in new and improved directions (Resendes 2014) for the learner. Rosenshine et al. (1996) linked primary school aged students (Grades 4, 5 and 6) questioning and comprehension and found intellectual sophistication concerning procedural prompts. To develop this intellectual sophistication, Howell (2014) indicates that the nature of the questions will need to be divergent – that is open, higher order and requiring original thought. This original thought is the indicator of learning. It means that not only is the student recalling some form of information from memory relevant to the lesson, but they are also attempting to apply information and other information “to explain, extrapolate or further analyse a topic, situation or problem” (Howell 2014, 340). Throughout the learning process, students subconsciously become accountable for the decision-making processes that build new knowledge and understandings. Where the learning process involves students asking questions, the “students are engaged in real epistemic invention” (Scardamalia and Bereiter 1992, p.  16). Consequently, student-generated questions indicate a different type of learning and engagement than teacher-generated questions or textbook predefined questions with fixed endpoints. Chin (2004) explains that questioning is associated with the development of critical thinking skills. The ability to ask meaningful geographical questions is an indication of student engagement and learning. However, to be able to produce geographical questions that facilitate a response of usable information in order to take learning forward requires a skill set encompassing some form of prior geographical knowledge, as well as language and literacy abilities. Also of importance is the classroom environment. Skamp (2012) informs us that questioning is pivotal to the development of thinking across all activities. The teacher needs to

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions

85

encourage student questioning, and for the use of different question stems, as well as providing the opportunity for the student to answer their own questions and then communicate their findings. Teacher scaffolding is essential as are the activities that respond to student-generated questions. ‘Student-generated questions’ is the term used in the literature to include questions raised or created by students in all contexts – in class for clarification, during class discussions, in online forums or to challenge their prior knowledge or experiences. Magrini (2012) claims that student-generated questions often indicate that the student is on a quest for a deeper self-understanding through a discussion with others. This learning, therefore, occurs in the live interactions that take place in the classroom. Because dialogues are usually constructive and participatory, both teachers and students should be participants in generating questions, engaging in the same pursuit of inquiry, and serving as actual co-learners and co-educators to each other. From this perspective, the key to distinguishing questioning as a model of authentic learning from questioning as a mere instructional technique is to incorporate student-generated questions in classroom learning. Student-generated questions can confirm an expectation, resolve an unexpected puzzle, and fill a recognized knowledge gap (Biddulph and Osborne 1982). Student-­ generated questions are an indication of what students are thinking about and their levels of conceptual understandings. Alternative conceptions, confusion, reasoning and simply asking for what they need to know, have long been probed in the research literature (see, for example, Maskill and Pedrosa de Jesus 1997; Donaldson 1978; Elstgeest 1985). In Kidman and Casinader (2017), I outlined how I see questioning as an aid for the student to reconcile his/her prior knowledge. Graesser and Olde (2003) discuss a ‘known unknown’ phenomenon, where prior knowledge and new knowledge meet. They identify it as cognitive disequilibrium, where “… questions are asked when individuals are confronted with obstacles to goals, anomalous events, contradictions, discrepancies, salient contrasts, obvious gaps in knowledge, expectation violations and decisions that require discrimination among equally attractive alternatives” (p. 525). Student-generated questions that indicate higher-order thinking is not often found in the classroom. Authors like Dillon (1988) and White and Gunstone (1992) attributed this to the students’ fear of being ridiculed by their classmates, and the role of the school as a cultural authority. When students do ask questions, they are more likely to be seeking factual information – a lower-order thinking level. Much of the research reporting student-generated questions relate to the questions in classroom discourse where the teacher asks for questions, and that the students respond with a question of the lower-order thinking level. Further research has revealed student-generated questions may be where the students simply raise their hand to ask a question. Additional research concerns the training of older students to generate questions for item-bank collection and examination purposes. Few studies consider the discourse between students, the discourse between student and teacher during a group activity (where only those in the immediate vicinity can hear the question), or the personal discourse where the student is thinking aloud, and asking a question of themselves.

86

G. Kidman

In this chapter, I report on the nature of student-generated questions during whole-class and small group work in Australian primary school classrooms where geographical content is being taught. The study did not find the students to be inhibited in generating questions as the early studies by Dillon (1988) and White and Gunstone (1992) concluded. Explanations maybe that changes in classroom pedagogical climates over the last 30 years have resulted in the encouragement of, and acceptance of, student questioning. In addition, the source of my student-generated questions included whole-class teaching (as in these earlier studies) as well as questions generated during small group work contexts; that is, situations with reduced fear of ridicule, and where discourse among students is encouraged. The use of the student-generated question, collected from spontaneous group discourses are considered more meaningful and reflective of cognitive activity than questions generated individually, or upon demand. The discourse that occurs between students during geographical group work activities contributes to in-depth thinking about their geographical topics, and I believe this leads to an improved level of questioning. Chin and Brown (2002) outlined two types or categories of student-generated questions: factual and procedural. Factual questions require only recall of knowledge whereas procedural questions seek clarification and guidance about a given procedure. Chin and Osborne (2008) later provided a summary of student-generated question typologies from the literature (see Table 1). It is unclear if the above typologies, as reported in the Chin and Osborne (2008) research, are sensitive to discipline-specific questioning. My work (see Kidman and Casinader 2017) is strongly discipline-based in terms of the nature of student-­ generated questions. In this current chapter, I utilise the typologies that I used earlier (see Kidman and Casinader 2017) to explore differences between Geography, Science and History student-generated questions. The typology differences were found to relate to disciplinary organisational structures, unique modes of teaching, different learning strategies used by students and teachers, as well as distinct beliefs about knowledge. This current chapter will explore how these typologies of

Table 1  Chin and Osborne’s research into student-generated question typologies Publication Baram-Tsabari and Yarden (2005) Pedrosa de Jesus et al. (2005) Chin and Kayalvizhi (2002) Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) Watts and Alsop (1995) Scardamalia and Bereiter (1992)

Research focus Field of interest, motivation for the question, type of information Confirmation (clarify) versus Transformation (reorganise understanding) Investigable versus non-investigable questions Remember, understand, apply, analyse, evaluate, create (cognitive processes – building on Bloom’s taxonomy Consolidation, exploration, elaboration (periods in the process of conceptual change) Text-based versus knowledge-based

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions

87

student-generated questions are influenced by age/academic progress during primary school Geography learnings. Below I report on the nature of student-generated questions from geographical inquiry-based learnings in four Australian primary school classrooms. Two classes of Year 2 students (n = 53; approximately 6 years of age) and two classes of Year 6 students (n = 55; approximately 12 years of age) were videotaped, and audio recorded, as they and their teachers explored a range of geographical inquiry topics. The students were encouraged to think aloud and to verbalise their thoughts during their geographical learnings. I used Portnoy and Rabinowitz’s (2014) framework of student-generated question types to categorise the questions: • Causal (a desire for a cause and effect relationship to be disclosed); • Comparison (the finding of similarities and dissimilarities between two or more phenomena or people); • Features (a distinctive attribute, trait or characteristic); • Function (clarification of how/why a phenomenon operates in a particular way); • Mechanism (how mechanical parts work together as an assembly); • Possibilities (where something might happen, as a choice or option); • Request for information (supplemental or additional information was needed, but not aligning with other typologies); and • Verification (accuracy of student ideas, and/or the truth or accuracy of the information. My recent work with Casinader (Kidman and Casinader 2017) and that of Portnoy and Rabinowitz (2014) indicate that students spontaneously ask different types of questions when in setting promoting natural dialogue. In furthering this work, when young students engage in geographical learning, the questions asked are an indicator of the student’s intellectual sophistication in terms of the geography of their immediate world. Student-generated questions are an indication that students are evaluating and interpreting the information they are engaging with. The language that the young student uses is often a cue to the intellectual framework that they are utilising to develop their understanding (Pontinen et al. 2019). For example, when the student asked “But who would build a well at the top of a hill?” (see Chapter 7 of this book), then the question indicates the student may be considering the well from a Functional viewpoint. Similarly, “What was the hill made of?” indicates the student was considering the rhyme from a Features viewpoint. Examples of Year 2 student-generated questions are: • • • • • • • •

Causal – How does the water make it slippery? Comparison – Is your park as good as mine? My Nana has the best park. Features – What was the hill made of? Function – But who would build a well at the top of a hill? Mechanism – How does the handle work? Wont it unwind? Possibilities – What if we made a gravel track, would that stop tripping over? Request for information – Is a hill big? Verification – So the rocks can come loose when it rains?

88

G. Kidman

Examples of Year 6 student-generated questions are: • Causal – But what causes the tides to come into the tributary? • Comparison – Do all the Asian languages have the same symbols like English and Italian have the same? • Features – Were the rivers always bending through the towns? • Function – Why are the tracks zig zagging up the hill? • Mechanism – What makes the needle move and shake like that? • Possibilities – What if we all tourists pay an environmental tax? • Request for information – How far is it between towns?? • Verification – So the scale is 1:500, isn’t it? As we explore the typology of student-generated questions obtained during geographical learnings in primary school classrooms, we can see how the intellectual sophistication of the student (established by age and schooling level) impacts on the question typology. The above two sets of examples indicate Year 6 students have a greater cognitive complexity that is reflected in their thinking. Fig. 2 provides us with a window into this phenomenon. A radar plot has been used to display the multivariate data (eight student-generated question typologies and two levels of intellectual sophistication – Year 2 and Year 6). Such plots are helpful in indicating the magnitude, as a percentage, of the two levels of intellectual sophistication surrounding the eight student-generated question typologies. The magnitudes of the

Typology of Student-Generated Quesons (as %) in Primary School Geography Lessons 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Fig. 2  Typology of student-generated questions

Year 2 Year 6

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions

89

levels of intellectual sophistication become easily discernable, allowing clusters and outliers to be visualised. The typology of student-generated questions depicted here in Fig.  2, includes only typologies where 10% or more of the student-generated questions fell into a particular typology for either, or both, of the Year 2 or the Year 6 class levels. For example, 12% of Year 6 student-generated questions were of the Verification type; therefore, I included this typology despite only 9% of such question types being uttered by Year 2 students. In Fig. 2, the influence of intellectual sophistication on student-generated questions is evident: younger students in Year 2 predominantly make a Request for Information, whereas the older students in Year 6 ask Features focused questions. Year 6 student-generated questions are in the form of Possibilities and asking for Verifications. This indicates that the students in the upper primary have the ability to think critically, to look for relationships, and know of the need to check for details. The younger Year 2 students do not readily ask such questions. As we would expect, young children have a reduced vocabulary in terms of their student-­generated questions, but as this work shows, the very young student of Geography can and does ask intelligible, relevant questions. The young child quite naturally asks causal and comparative questions. The crux of thinking is in the questions asked (Shodell 1995), and all students need to have the opportunity to learn in environments that foster discussion and the generation of spontaneous questions. To get a deeper understanding of the influence of intellectual sophistication and the typologies of geographical student-generated questions beyond the primary classroom, I looked into the secondary school. Table 2 provides an extension of the typology of question types for student-generated questions in Geography classrooms in Year 9 and 11 (ages approximately 15 years and 17 years). Causal questions continue to increase as the student progresses with their geographical education as do Comparison questions, however, we do not see the real increase in this typology until the student is studying post-compulsory Geography. The opposite trend is evident for the Request for Information typology. This is to be expected as the older the learner, the greater their cognitive ability to locate and discern their own information. Students, when unfamiliar with the context, with less prior knowledge, tend to ask confirmatory or lower-order questions. As the Table 2  Typology extended beyond the primary Geography classroom Question types Causal Comparison Features Function Mechanism Possibilities Request for Information Verification

Year 2 (%) 14 13 14 13 10 11 16 9

Year 6 (%) 13 14 19 15 11 13 3 12

Year 9 (%) 20 13 14 16 11 12 4 10

Year 11 (%) 24 22 8 12 13 11 2 8

90

G. Kidman

cognitive complexity increases, the question type is of a higher-order, becoming transformative and has higher educational potential (Aflalo 2018). The asking of questions allows for greater critical and higher-order thinking to occur. Questioning is a fundamental skill needed for problem-solving, reasoning, and critical thinking – all essential in Geography, and to understand our world in terms of the past, present and future. Aflalo (2018) describes questioning as being necessary to clarify information, discover and complete what is missing, and gain motivation for learning. As outlined in Chapter 7, in this book, questioning can also influence the lesson’s sequence where inquiry-based practices are being used. Teachers in the classrooms and schools where this research was conducted claimed not to have taught students to ask these questions. The teachers do use extensive teacher-generated questions throughout their teaching, but it is beyond the scope of this chapter to explore the influence of such questions on student-generated questions. As outlined throughout this book, Geography, in the primary school setting, is often one element in an integrated subject, rather than having the status of a discipline in its own right. Often integrated with History into a form of Social Studies, we can expect to see a compromise in geographical thoughts and understandings developed in our classrooms. In primary classrooms, Geography, like Science, is often included in thematic topics and taught superficially (Laidlaw et al. 2009). This has an impact on the nature of the inquiry, the taxonomy of the student-generated questions, and the resultant pattern of intellectual sophistication. It would be of interest to continue this taxonomic analysis into secondary school settings, beyond the brief overview in this chapter, to explore the influence of separating Geography from History and other Humanities subjects to determine the full influence of age (intellectual sophistication) upon student-generated questions where Geography is taught as a disciplinary subject. Also, of interest, would be an investigation of the questioning practices of the Geography teacher, at both the primary and secondary level, exploring the influence of teacher questioning on student-generated questions.

Conclusion In conclusion, this chapter demonstrates that in primary classrooms, geography lessons are the foundation for geographical learnings in secondary classrooms. The typology of student-generated questions provided in this chapter indicates the need for teachers to provide opportunities for students to discuss their ideas in small groups as well as a whole class. These discussions must encourage the students to question their learnings. Student-generated questions, spontaneously asked during natural classroom discourse in lessons presenting geographical concepts has not, to my knowledge been reported in the research literature. This chapter is thus important as it provides an insight into the nature of questioning in the primary Geography classroom  – giving a voice to the student. A major conclusion is that student-­ generated questions and natural discourse concerning geographical concepts and

Geographical Question Typologies: Student-Generated Questions

91

ideas should be included in all primary classrooms. Geography is an interdisciplinary learning area, and the thinking skills enhanced through student-generated questioning are likely to be transferable to other learning areas. I have provided an analysis of Year 2 and Year 6 student-generated questions uttered during geographical learnings. The analysis is not an exhaustive description of the generation and use of student questioning, nor is it a comprehensive typology of questions. What I have sought to do is provide a discourse-grounded view of the relationship that exists between questioning and intellectual sophistication when we consider student-generated questions. To that end, I illustrated a new form of questioning discourse analysis (the radar plot) that I consider to a be a useful tool for researchers interested in better understanding the multivariate practice of student-­ generated questioning across Year levels (ages) (and disciplines as in Kidman and Casinader 2017). I have shown that for the students in this study, the types of questions they asked differed depending upon the intellectual sophistication of the questioner. As the intellectual sophistication increases, the prevalence of the typologies of Request for Further Information questions declines. The inverse occurs for Comparison and Causal questions  – their prevalence increases as the intellectual sophistication increases. These findings lead us to an important implication: Teachers need to be aware of the developmental nature of student-generated questions. This is important as the young Geography student not only askes lower-order questions, they can in fact generate questions across a variety of taxonomies, some of which are of a higher order. We need to facilitate this amazing ability in our primary schools.

References Aflalo E (2018) Students generating questions as a way of learning. Active Learn Higher Educ 22(1):63–75 Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (eds) (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2011) Shape of the Australian curriculum: geography. Author, Sydney Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2015) Geography Sequence of Content 7–10. v8.1 https://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/Geography_-­_Sequence_ of_content.pdf Baram-Tsabari A, Yarden A (2005) Characterizing children’s spontaneous interests in science and technology. Int J Sci Educ 27(5):803–826 Biddulph F, Osborne R (1982) Some issues relating to children’s questions and explanations (LISP(P) Working paper no. 106). University of Waikato, Waikato Chin C (2004) Students’ questions: fostering a culture of inquisitiveness in science classrooms. School Sci Rev 86(314):107–112 Chin C, Brown DE (2002) Student-generated questions: a meaningful aspect of learning in science. Int J Sci Educ 24(5):521–549 Chin C, Kayalvizhi G (2002) Posing problems for open investigations: what questions do pupils ask? Res Sci Technol Educ 20(2):269–287

92

G. Kidman

Chin C, Osborne J (2008) Students’ questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Stud Sci Educ 44(1):1–39 Dillon JT (1988) The remedial status of student questioning. J Curric Stud 20(3):197–210 Donaldson M (1978) Children’s minds. Falmer Press, London Elstgeest J (1985) The right question at the right time. In: Harlen W (ed) Primary science: taking the plunge. Heinemann, London, pp 36–46 Gillies R (2003) The behaviours, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. J Educ Psychol 95(1):137–147 Graesser A, Olde B (2003) How does one know whether a person understands a device? The quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. J Educ Psychol 95(3):524–536 Gregg M, Leinhardt G (1993) Geography in history: what is the Where? J Geogr 92(2):56–63 Howell J (2014) Teaching and learning: building effective pedagogies. Melbourne, Oxford Kidman G, Casinader N (2017) Inquiry-based teaching and learning across disciplines: comparative theory and practice in schools. Palgrave Macmillan, London Laidlaw K-R, Taylor N, Fletcher P (2009) Teaching primary science in rural and regional Australia: some challenges facing practicing and pre-service teachers. J Sci Math Educ Southeast Asia 32(2):105–130 Magrini J (2012) Towards a phenomenological understanding of the ontological aspects of teaching and learning. Philosophy Scholarship. Paper 31 Maskill R, Pedrosa De Jesus H (1997) Pupils’ questions, alternative frameworks and the design of science teaching. Int J Sci Educ 19(7):781–799 Mercer N (1996) The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learn Instr 6(4):359–377 Pedrosa de Jesus H, Neri De Souza F, Teixiera-Dias JJC, Watts M (2005) Organising the chemistry of question-based learning: a case study. Res Sci Technol Educ 23(2):179–193 Pontinen S, Karkkainen S, Pihlainen K, Raty-Zaborszky S (2019) Pupil-generated questions in a collaborative open inquiry. Educ Sci 9:1–15 Portnoy LB, Rabinowitz M (2014) What's in a domain: understanding how students approach questioning in history and science. Educ Res Eval 20(2):122–145 Resendes M (2014) Enhancing knowledge building discourse in early primary education: effects of formative feedback. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto Rosenshine B, Meister C, Chapman S (1996) Teaching students to generate questions: a review of the intervention studies. Rev Educ Res 66(2):181–221. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170607 Scardamalia M, Bereiter C (1992) Text-based and knowledge-based questioning by children. Cognit Instr 9(3):177–199 Shodell M (1995) The question-driven classroom: students questions as course curriculum in biology. Am Biol Teach 57(5):278–281 Skamp K (2012) Teaching primary science constructively. Cengage Learning, Melbourne Watts M, Alsop S (1995) Questioning and conceptual understanding: the quality of pupils’ questions in science. School Sci Rev 76(277):91–95 White RT, Gunstone RF (1992) Probing understanding. Falmer Press, London

Part II

Experiencing and Visualising

Part II aims to enrich the discourse in teaching and learning primary geography through consideration of classroom lived experiences. The importance of the pedagogical approach is critical for engagement. Chapter “Inquiry-­Based Practices in Primary School Geography” considers inquiry-based practices. Inquiry is seen as an essential part of Geography education, however much of the success of geographical inquiry-based practices in primary classrooms depends upon the inquiry literacy of the teacher. Using an appreciative inquiry framework, the chapter develops a set of five geographical inquiry pedagogical principles: Personal Interest, Respectful Productivity, Learning Independence, Intellectual Extension, and Reflection that guide geographical inquiry teaching and learning in primary school. Chapter “Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia” presents another essential pedagogy of Geography – fieldwork. An interesting perspective of the chapter is that it highlights and demonstrates areas that encourage teachers to include fieldwork in their primary classroom, their school grounds and their local area. The opportunities for fieldwork as a cross-curriculum priority are also presented and supported by literature that emphasizes the importance of fieldwork to build student creativity, confidence and independent learning opportunities. Chapter “Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography” relates to the development of spatial thinking in primary Geography. It draws heavily from the cognitive and learning sciences literature to present contemporary understandings of the role of spatial thinking in the acquisition of key language and mathematical skills as well as geographical understandings and abilities. There is an emerging consensus that spatial thinking is fundamental to later success in math, science, and geography. The chapter considers the importance of teaching mapping. Chapter “The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence” informs us of how Geography teaching can contribute to reconstructing the complex, digitally shaped reality of life. Digital media is shown to support learning and cognitive processes during geography lessons in such a way that includes the development of the understanding of geography as a scientific process. The book concludes with chapter “Setting the Foundation  – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography” that provides a brief synthesis of the book in terms of the current teaching and learning research for geography

94

II  Experiencing and Visualising

teaching in primary school, and what is needed in the future. The chapter argues why geography in primary school must be a compulsory subject based on a multi-­ perspective, integrative and problem-solving approach. The chapter concludes with a Framework for Primary Geography Education, which highlights the essential present and future learnings, indicating three critical goals: dispositions, knowledge, and responsibility.

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography Gillian Kidman and Deya Chakraborty

Abstract  Primary school Geography in Australia provides ample opportunity for students to actively explore their world, and to learn the processes a geographer follows when faced with a geographical question or issue. However much of the success of geographical inquiry-based practices in primary classrooms depends upon the inquiry literacy of the teacher. This chapter uses a case study to explore one primary school teacher’s geographical inquiry literacy through a case study. The stages of the mandated ‘Inquiry and Skills’ strand of the Australian Curriculum: HAAS are used to present a case study of the Jack and Jill nursery rhyme, and attempt to answer the question “What was the hill made of?” Using an appreciative inquiry framework, the chapter develops a set of five geographical inquiry pedagogical principles: Personal Interest, Respectful Productivity, Learning Independence, Intellectual Extension, and Reflection. These principles guide geographical inquiry teaching and learning in primary school. The relationship between students and their learning environment, and their expectations towards skills and attitudes is critical. The conceptualization of these pedagogical principles reflects the teachers’ rich understanding of good teaching practice in general. Keywords  Inquiry and skills · Primary school · Geography · Appreciative inquiry · Pedagogical principles

Introduction Ideally, the teaching of Geography in primary school involves the teaching of personal, social, cultural and environmental issues across time and place. This broad array of real-life issues highlights that geographical learning is fundamental to understanding and appreciating the world the student lives in. However, there are G. Kidman (*) · D. Chakraborty Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_7

95

96

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

concerns that geographical knowledge and skills are not taught well in primary school. Few primary school teachers have the training to teach Geography, so the teaching of Geography often becomes a form of integration of social and environmental concepts, which frequently fails to promote the key ideas, skills and knowledge of Geography (Catling et  al. 2013). The purpose of this chapter is not to evaluate good and better Geography teaching practices in primary schools. Instead, the purpose is to explore inquiry-based learning – a pedagogical process considered effective for investigating the world by tapping into students’ interests, curiosity and excitement. The conceptual framework we used in the research reported in this chapter was guided by two inter-related theories. These are Vygotsky’s social constructivist learning theory and Cooperrider and Srivastava’s (1987) appreciative inquiry. Social constructivism suggests that learners would construct knowledge out of their shared experiences. Specifically, the social constructivism in relation to guided learning would show problem solving, collaborative learning and critical reflection are vital components of geographical inquiry-based learning. Cooperrider and Srivastava’s (1987) appreciative inquiry framework emphasises positivity. Positive questions amplify a positive core, allowing us to learn from the strengths of the classroom teacher. Thus, the central premise of this chapter is that we can learn a lot from teachers who excel in their planning and teaching. The educational literature has ‘inquiry-based practices’ dating back to the work of John Dewey, however Maxim (2006) claims it goes back much further to Ancient Greece, but “contends that it previously travelled under such names as the Socratic method, problem solving, critical thinking, scholarly investigation and scientific thinking” (p. 348). Although inquiry-based learning and teaching has been considered good practice for some time, inquiry practices have not been consistently adopted. This is due to inquiry being difficult to define and then difficult to imagine since it “is a multifaceted concept, it has identities in multiple disciplines, is conceptualized from both the teaching and learning perspectives, and is referred to through a variety of nomenclatures” (Kidman and Casinader 2017, p. 4). A Geographical inquiry is about the student being engaged in the creation of shared understandings about their world. It contrasts with traditional pedagogies: inquiry requires the student to construct knowledge and refine their skills instead of being asked to memorise facts and knowledge from a book or worksheets (Martin 2006). The role of the teacher during an inquiry, according to Kidman and Casinader (2017), is to facilitate the students’ construction of knowledge through the active investigation of a topic of interest. During the inquiry, “the teacher works with the students to develop their abilities to ask geographical questions and to look for answers through investigative work” (Halocha 1998, p. 41). Often this investigative work takes place outside the classroom as fieldwork activities, along with other specific skills involved in the interpretation of atlases, maps and photographs, and the analysis of data. An essential aim of primary geography is to “foster fascination with places through fieldwork and the use of new technologies in and beyond the school grounds and the local area” (Catling and Willy 2009, p. 18). However, as this chapter will illustrate, a geographical inquiry can be based in the classroom, and not require fieldwork.

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

97

This chapter considers the teaching of Geography in primary school classroom settings via inquiry-based practices. The chapter initially explores the nature of geographical inquiry-based learning as mandated in the Australian Curriculum. The chapter presents a case study of a geographical inquiry from a Year 2 classroom in Queensland, Australia. The teacher’s role during the inquiry is presented in terms of her geographical inquiry literacy – a necessary requirement for her geographical inquiry-based teaching. The students’ developing geographical inquiry literacy is presented in terms of their knowledge construction and skill development.

The Geographical Inquiry Process in Australian Schools As outlined in chapter “The Integrated Nature of Geography Education in German and Australian Primary Schools”, the Australian Curriculum mandated in primary schools has Geography and History sharing an integrated curriculum, housed under the banner of “Humanities and Social Sciences” (HASS). The aim of HASS is for the student to develop a sense of wonder, curiosity, and an interest in the study of HASS concepts. There are two strands to the HASS curriculum: ‘Inquiry and Skills’, and ‘Knowledge and Understanding’. The Inquiry and Skills strand supports the Knowledge and Understanding strand. The concepts for developing geographical thinking relate to students’ understanding of place, space, environment, interconnection, sustainability, scale and change (ACARA 2015). To contextualise the Year 2 case study presented below, the ‘Knowledge and Understanding’ that requires developing, in conjunction with the ‘Inquiry and Skills’ is for students to explore how distance and accessibility influence how often we visit places, and for what purpose (space, interconnection) and investigate their links with places locally and throughout the world (interconnection). Students see how places have meaning to people (place, environment, interconnection). The HASS curriculum provides key inquiry questions for each year level. The first question relates to learning in two or more of the sub-strands, and how they might be connected. The second question relates to the sub-strands and develops students’ Knowledge and Understanding, and Inquiry and Skills. These questions are intended as suggestions for teachers to use or to modify or to develop their own to suit their local context. For the case study presented below, the teacher chose to develop her own inquiry question from a single student-generated question, posed during a classroom English language activity. The Inquiry and Skills strand includes sub-strands that are skills represented broadly as Questioning, Researching, Analysing, Evaluating and Reflecting, and Communicating. An initial explanation of the stages of the inquiry process in the Inquiry and Skills strand of the Australian Curriculum: HASS is provided in Fig. 1 (ACARA 2015). The geographical inquiry process appears to be linear, beginning with questioning, ideally posed by the student/s. The student/s then researches the problem, analyses the data and then evaluates and reflects upon the findings before communicating the solution to the initial question. However, as we will see in the case study, the process is not always linear. Instead, the teacher facilitates the

98

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty Questioning Pose questions about past and present objects, people, places and events Researching • Collect data and information from observations and identify information and data from sources provided • Sort and record information and data, including location, in tables and on plans and labelled maps • Sequence familiar objects and events Analysing • Explore a point of view • Compare objects from the past with those from the present and consider how places have changed over time • Interpret data and information displayed in pictures and texts and on maps Evaluating and reflecting • Draw simple conclusions based on discussions, observations and information displayed in pictures and texts and on maps • Reflect on learning to propose how to care for places and sites that are important or significant Communicating • Present narratives, information and findings in oral, graphic and written forms using simple terms to denote the passing of time and to describe direction and location •

Fig. 1  Australian curriculum: HASS inquiry and skills sub-strands

learning in a form of iterative experiences, with multiple occurrences of analysis and evaluation, facilitated by reflection, and with questioning throughout. The goal of this chapter is to outline the application of each of these skills using a case study from a Year 2 classroom. It should be noted that there is a learning progression of Inquiry and Skills in the Australian Curriculum: HASS, and that the primary years of HASS set the foundation for geographical learnings in secondary school. As such, the students in the Year 2 age group (approximately 6 years of age) require explicit teaching, with the teacher emphasizing key vocabulary, asking key questions, but also encouraging the asking of questions, guiding the information, evidence and/or data to be gathered, and guiding the data analysis and the methods of communication. For a teacher to successfully guide the development of these inquiry skills in their students, one would expect the teacher to have mastered the skills themselves  – that is, to be geographically inquiry literate (Kidman and Casinader 2017).

Case Study Year 2 Jack and Jill In this case study, the students and teachers were not studying Geography per se. The teacher planned her lessons as a thematic unit and taught the geography curriculum through that theme. The curriculum theme was Nursery Rhymes, and the teacher was conducting an English language lesson around Jack and Jill, a popular nursery rhyme. The aim of the lesson was to explore rhyming words (e.g., Jill / hill; down / crown) and new vocabulary words (e.g., fetch, pail, crown) – thus, an English

99

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography Fig. 2  Inquiry stimulus

“But who would build a well at the top of a hill?”

“What was the hill made out of?”

language lesson. During the reading of the rhyme, one boy, Matty (aged 6) asked: “What was the hill made out of?” This simple question enabled the teacher to instigate a geographical inquiry that integrated Geography learning objectives with Science, English and Physical Education learning objectives. Figure 2 depicts both the stimulus question (“What was the hill made out of?”) and a concluding reflection question (“But who would build a well at the top of a hill?”) from this Year 2 classroom. The teacher was flexible with her initial teaching plan1, to modify her 4-week teaching plan to incorporate this learning opportunity. The teacher considered the student’s question as a teaching opportunity, as an opportunity to engage the students’ interests, and to integrate her lessons across the curriculum.

The Role of the Teacher: Geographical Inquiry Literacy To assist in clarifying what a classroom-based geographical inquiry is, Kidman and Casinader (2017, p. 5) identified three frameworks that guide successful classroom inquiries: 1 . The identification of classroom goals. 2. The degree of teacher direction. 3. The instructional approach. These three frameworks must be considered by the teacher as critical components of their inquiry planning. As a result, they guide the teachers’ role and actions in the classroom. However, the teachers need go beyond just considering the three

1  The use of underlining is to highlight the strengths of the teacher – in line with Cooperrider and Srivastava’s (1987) appreciative inquiry framework.

100

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

Classroom Goals

Degree of Teacher Direction

Classroom Goals

Inquiry Literacy

Degree of Teacher Direction Instructional Approach

Instructional Approach

Fig. 3  Developing inquiry literacy. (Modified from Kidman and Casinader 2017, p. 7)

frameworks in their planning, the frameworks must also be intertwined, with the student at the centre of the process, as a participant, and becoming more and more independent in their learning process. According to Kidman and Casinader (2017), an outcome of this intertwining process is the inquiry literacy (see Fig. 3) of both the teacher and the student. Inquiry literacy is the ability to critically understand the language, skills and symbols of inquiry, and to reflect on their meaning and usage during an inquiry (Shore et al., 2009). In relation to the geographical inquiry teaching reported in this chapter, the teacher’s geographical inquiry literacy influenced her role in the classroom – both before and during any particular lesson. She had clearly defined classroom goals (learning to mirror the processes a geographer follows; and the learning of geographical knowledge). In the discussions with the teacher, she outlined that she wanted her students’ learning to be fluid, so they could grow to be independent learners, and to some extent, for the learning to be both formal and informal. Thus, she outlined her classroom goals were to: • Build opportunities for the students to learn collaboratively. • Encourage risk-taking where the students were not timid to try new things, and were willing to fail – to learn to fail meant to learn from failure. • Foster language and phrase development – “From your point of view, how …?” • Foster critical thinking and argumentation around content from the learning areas of English, Geography, Science, and Physical Education. Authentic interdisciplinary links were sought to foster transfer of understanding. • Encourage the use of new vocabulary drawn from the targeted learning areas (Table 1 provides a listing of the new vocabulary the teacher aimed to develop in relation to the learning area of Geography). • Promote a ‘decision and evidence’ combination to learning and reporting. The teacher varied her degree of teacher direction (the amount of structure, guidance and coaching provided to the students). She described that during her teaching, she needed to try to keep her level of teacher direction in the low to the medium range:

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

101

Table 1  New vocabulary being introduced to the classroom Geographical vocabulary emphasised in the teaching and learning Cause and effect Characteristics of places Ecosystem (non-living and living) Environment Evidence Features of places Geomorphic/geomorphic landscape Landform Location Natural vegetation Point of view Perspective

Data Erosion Fieldwork Landscape Place

• To develop a positive learning environment where students felt they had a role in the learning process. • To foster student thinking and encourage active learning as much as possible. • To encourage academic independence. The teacher felt she was able to step back from being in control of knowledge generation through her questioning to the students. For example, she said, “I favour the use of open questions like what, why, how. I want the students to think and provide explanations”. She watched the students closely and questioned the students when she wanted to determine student thinking. “I ask probing questions to reveal my students’ subconscious ideas”. The teacher used her questions to broaden the students’ vocabulary. She introduced new words at appropriate times during student explanations. The teacher varied her instructional approach (the interdisciplinary pedagogies of a Geographical inquiry linking, in the case of this chapter to science, mathematics, English and physical education). The teacher explained how she: • Used a local landform visible from the school sports grounds to reinforce the concept of a hill. • Provided extensive resources (for example, a playground, ramps, clay, water, gravel, tumbling mats) for students to experience and observe/collect data and ideas. • Fostered language and phrase use. I needed to avoid fieldwork external to the school. Fieldwork and excursions require extensive forward planning, so I needed to be creative and use what was available at the school. We can see a hill or mountain, I’m not sure if it’s a mountain, from the classroom window, so we used that. We can go to the pre-school or school playground to use the slide as our hill to look at ‘slide’ as a type of movement. Oh, and I got mats from the sports room, and library cushions to create a tumble zone that was not going to injure us as we tripped, rolled, tumbled down our hill.

In addition to the teacher needing to intertwine the three frameworks outlined above, the teacher also needed to consider the students’ literate behaviour in relation to both the text and the image in the nursery rhyme book, and the process the student follows to make sense of, and create their own the texts and images. As will be discussed in the following sections, the lessons that the teacher prepared assisted with the students’ developing a conceptual understanding of both a geographical inquiry

102

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

and considerable geographical content knowledge and skills. The students developed skills whilst engaging in the inquiry process independently, and importantly, the students were encouraged to collaboratively become inquirers and critical consumers of information. Students were constantly asking questions of themselves, each other, and the teacher. They collected evidence and made decisions based on the evidence. The geographical inquiry literacy skills of the teacher saw the combination of geographical skills and the purpose of using the skills to bring the geographical inquiry to life for the students. French and Marschall (2018), and Kidman and Casinader (2017) both outline that inquiry-based teaching is a continuum. At one end is traditional teaching, where the teacher has a high locus of control, there is direct instruction where the telling of knowledge is the teaching approach. At the other end of the continuum is learning discovery. During learning discovery, the learner has more agency – is in control, the teacher has low locus of control, ensuring safety and the facilitation of equipment and process. Between these continuum points is the inquiry experience which may be structured (teacher decides most components), guided (teacher and students co-decide and teacher facilitates), or open (Students make decisions, Teacher is a mentor and makes suggestions). In the primary geography classroom, the students are more likely to experience a structured or guided inquiry if they experience an inquiry at all. Open inquiry is suited to the more capable student in secondary school. This case study provides an example of a guided inquiry where the teacher’s questioning assisted to focus and refocus the iterative investigations. The students were invited to make resource selection, methodology, and communication choices to maintain ownership of the inquiry.

Knowledge Construction and Skill Development Inquiry-based practices in Geography necessitates the whole class, both the teacher and the students, to work together to develop a solution to a problem of interest to the students. In this case study, the children were interested to explore the composition of the ‘hill’ in the nursery rhyme. To develop a solution to the question “What was the hill made of?”, the teacher needed to provide a learning environment that would mirror the processes a geographer follows to develop a solution. The class needed to ask questions, apply past and new knowledge and seek answers to the leading plus subsequent questions. We use the stages of the inquiry process outlined in Fig.  1 (above) from the Australian Curriculum: HASS (ACARA 2015) as an organiser for the remainder of this chapter.

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

103

Questioning Inquiry-based practices in Geography require questioning. Questioning in this case study helped to focus the students’ learnings and develop knowledge and skills through questioning the nature of, and the associated implications of the ‘hill’ in the nursery rhyme – before, during and after the stages of their inquiry. The students were encouraged to question both the teacher, their peers, as well as themselves. The intent of questioning in the primary school geography classroom is to move the student from asking factual questions to asking conceptual questions. “What was the hill made of?” is classified as a features question (see chapter “Geographical Question Typologies: Student-­Generated Questions”) where a distinct attribute, trait or characteristic is the focus. Such a question is similar to a factual question that focuses on a topic and highlights facts that enable generalising at a later time in the learning. Conceptual questions require higher-order thinking, where the students need to create the answer and not simply recall a fact. Similarly, the asking of a conceptual question indicates the question-asker is thinking deeply, looking for explanations, attempting to transfer ideas from one situation to another – to create and transfer knowledge. The nature of questioning in a geographical inquiry is more than just a stimulus question. It is more than the teacher questioning the student. It also includes the student questioning their learning and the outcomes of their efforts. For example, consider Table 2. The questions asked by the students also reveal an interest in their own learning and in improving their performance and task outcomes. The metacognitive questions asked by the students during and after their inquiry indicate they were facilitated by the teacher’s questions. Throughout the 4-week teaching time, the teacher and students continually asked questions to reveal they were building on underlying ideas. The questioning discourses between the teacher and students facilitated the students’ visualisation skills thus providing ‘a light’ to work towards: How well a child can imagine something and work towards it depends upon the knowledge and experience level of that student. So, I need to try to get the students to visualise something familiar – like the steep road outside K-Mart. We all sit still, eyes closed, hands in our laps and slowly imagine K-Mart, then the road, then I introduce the idea of driving up and Table 2  Student interactions: Questioning Student metacognitive questions … but it’s not doing what I need it to do. Why? What am I doing wrong? I’m wondering if we can make him trip on the rock, will we have worked it out? I don’t understand. Are we doing it right? What can I do to make it work? I’m not doing much. What didn’t work? Why can they do it?

Teacher response questions What is it you are trying to do? Why is it wrong? Can we go back to your plan and see what we are trying to do? Maybe that will remind us of what we need to do. What part is not working? Can you see if you can fix that? What are you noticing that is different between your work and theirs?

104

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

down it. A photo might help as a starting point. I then start the kids trying to imagine how they could build this scene to have toy cars drive up and down a slope. Slope – hill … you get it? We go from familiar to abstract through visualisation. We see the light at the end of the tunnel, so know where we want to go, and I can then start to question them on how to build a ramp to pretend to be our hill.

The initial questioning around students prior knowledge, the depth of their thinking and wonderings provided areas for the teacher to determine if the students were ready to begin the Researching stage of the inquiry. I began to realise the kids were open-minded to the possibility the hill could be made of grass, or rocks, or gravel or simply dirt. They were accepting the ideas from their peers so I thought they could undertake an iterative research process. I wanted all students to test out all the possibilities over time. Like, do 4 or 5 experiments only changing the surface of the hill and then deciding what the hill was made of, like changing one variable. I thought two of the kids would struggle with the prolonged nature of finding a possible answer to the question, so I decided to try to keep their interest and give them a head start by making them my assistants. Midway between lessons, we would gather equipment, and try it out to ensure the surface was appropriate. For example, really rough sandpaper was used for fine gravel, and I had the two students show me how to trip and tumble on the crash mats.

Familiarising the two students with the nature of the next lesson also assisted with the development of their prior knowledge and increased their confidence in making informed contributions like making a suggestion of the hill being made out of clay: “Can we try clay? Will it get really slippery when jack spills the water?” Such suggestions were implemented by the teacher in the iterative Researching stage of the geographical inquiry.

Researching The curriculum requirement for Researching in a geographical inquiry is to collect, sort, record and sequence data and information from a variety of sources (see Fig. 1). The teacher is required to provide opportunities for the students to use both primary and secondary data sources as well as observations, and to use disciplinary conventions to represent the learnings. In this case study, the teacher initially decided to offer four lessons to explore tumbles, trips and slips that might occur when walking down a grass, gravel, rock or dirt-covered hill with a bucket of water. She later included the notion of a clay surface at the suggestion of a student. In the first instance, the class worked with the sports teacher to explore the nature of Jack’s fall (did he trip, slip, or tumble?) so that the students could experience, visualise, and represent the movements in relation to their hill’s surface. Symbols were developed during this lesson to represent each movement and are depicted in Table 3. Each student was assisted in experiencing each type of movement. In small groups, the students discussed the positioning of the head and feet during particular movements. Diagrams were sketched as to what it might have looked like as Jack tripped, slipped, or tumbled. The diagram in Table 3 depicts students’ sketches and

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

105

Table 3  Student interactions: Researching Student actions

Student sketch and symbol

Experienced tumbling, tripping, rolling, slipping etc Simulated and recorded movements (trip, slip, tumble) as data Explored cause and effect through observations Use of geographical terminology, critical thinking and argumentation Adding arrows, symbols, and simple words to wall posters displaying trip, slip, tumble

Clarify the purpose of the activity - to determine if clay was at the top of the hill

Review procedures for a handson activity

Manage the distribution of materials

Set students onto task

Check progress of students

Check each student knows how to proceed

Check for any material issues

Check students are discussing politely

Supervises the clean-up of materials

Move students away from the materials

Records data for whole class viewing

Fig. 4  Pedagogical approach during a Researching stage of the inquiry

symbols. The symbol relates to the movement of Jack’s head as he tripped – it followed a downward arc. Through repeated observations and experiences of ‘tripping’, one student suggested “when I trip I pretend there is something in front of me foot, so me foot stops but me head doesn’t” (Boy Student 1). The teacher regrouped the class to explore what might have been in front of Jack’s foot. Various suggestions were offered by the class: “a tree”, “a bucket”, “a stick”, and then a girl suggested “a rock, but not a loose one. It was big and stuck in the ground. Jack must have tripped over the rock because he broke his crown, so um so he bumped his head so went head first. He tripped .. on a rock” (Girl Student 1). The teacher then questioned the class about the ‘ground’. “What was the ground made of that had a rock sticking out of it?” With the understanding that there were rock protrusions on the hill, the class undertook five separate activities (clay, grass, gravel, rock, dirt) to explore what the ground substrate might have been. Figure  4 is a pedagogical map used by the teacher. We follow this with an excerpt of the classroom discourse from the clay

106

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

activity. The grass, gravel, rock, and dirt activities were very similar, thus providing an iterative approach to Researching. Stimulus Question: Could the hill be made out of clay (grass, gravel, rock)? Materials: Students were each provided with air-dried balls of clay and bowls of water. Activity sequence: Class discussion centred around the characteristics of the air-­ dried clay. The students were then asked to moisten their hands and the balls of clay and to discuss the changing characteristics. • As the students called out additional characteristics and changes, the teacher compiled a list of words on the whiteboard (for example, messy, wet, soft). • When a child mentioned the word “slippery”, the teacher said “Yes!” with much enthusiasm, but said nothing more, and did not move to write the word on the board. The children recognised this was a time to think about what was last said and to reflect on its significance to the overall task. • After 20 seconds, the teacher asked “What are you thinking?” • A boy raised his hand and said “there might be clay up the hill that will dry out in the sun, but when you get water onto it from the well, it gets wet and slippery… might Jack have slipped on the clay?” (Boy Student 2). • The girl who offered up the word ‘slippery’ added “but then um no. When you slip your feet go front first and you land on your butt. Jack didn’t slip – he tripped to break his crown” (Girl Student 2). • Another student said “Jill might have slipped” prompting the teacher to redirect the discussion back to the nursery rhyme, where the students read aloud the relevant line “… and Jill came tumbling after”. • The students did not reach a consensus as to the involvement of the clay on the hill. The teacher explained that they would explore another surface in another lesson. By taking an iterative approach to the Researching stage, the teacher was able to adopt a predictive strategy during the iterations. Students were required to predict how each different surface would influence Jack’s fall. In their predictions, researching and explanations, the students utilised the symbols and their growing vocabulary to offer solutions to their question “What was the hill made of?” The teacher explained her focus on the use of symbols: I wanted the students to think 2-ways. To think from words to symbols and symbols to words. The work we did in PE with the movements, and then thinking of these in terms of symbols and lines is sort of geography, and I guess the hill composition is maybe rock science, but it’s the skills that I am developing. Maps have symbols that need interpreting, and so we are working with symbols and landforms. A hill is a place and we go to places for a purpose – like to get water. So in the geographical inquiry, I need to cover content but also skills and thinking. We need to think what is relevant and what isn’t, and how to make decisions as we do the research, and symbols make it easier to show relationships like the type of movement and ground surface. Symbols are important for young learners.

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

107

Analysing The Analysing stage involves the student exploring their data and evidence in an attempt to locate patterns, trends and relationships. The collation of data and transforming it into evidence requires generalisations. The teacher in this case study often stated she was developing thinking, asking “How?” and “Why?” questions during much of the geographical inquiry. A questioning sequence during the Analysing phase was usually a four-part dialogue: 1 . The teacher asked a question: How did Jack fall? 2. The student explains his or her thinking: Jack tripped on a rock and bumped his head as he rolled down the hill 3. The teacher extends the student’s thinking by asking: So what is important about the rock? 4. The student explains: The rock is sticking up out of the ground and was big enough to trip Jack’s foot. Water from the well or the rain might have washed away some of the ground covers like clay or gravel making the rock stick out from other rocks making up the hill. This questioning sequence informs the teacher that the student responding has the ability to explain their thinking and has a level of conceptual understanding. The emphasis of discussion during this stage of the inquiry highlighted the teacher’ goals of developing critical thinking and argumentation, along with decision making linked to the evidence. Vocabulary development was emphasised during the Analysing stage as indicated in Table 4. The teacher used wooden tongue depressors to provide sentence starters for the students. When called upon, the student would select a sentence starter from a basket provided by the teacher. The student was then required to complete the sentence using whatever format or materials the student chose.

Evaluating and Reflecting The evaluating and reflecting stage of the geographical inquiry is an extension of the Analysing stage. Students explain events or phenomena. They make evidence-based conclusions, negotiate conclusions or solutions to the question. In this case study, the students worked in small groups to respond to a common sentence starter stick:

Table 4  Vocabulary fostering: Analysing Sentence starters From my perspective … From our point of view, we think …

Student response I think there is water wastage from the well Jill fell over Jack’s bucket and tried to do a roll and not bump her head too.

108

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

Critically thinking, we want to argue that … The groups did not know they all had the same sentence starter. The teacher explained: I wanted to see what each group was thinking on the same topic. If I were to ask the whole class, they tend to copy or repeat what they have heard. But in small groups they have to come up with something, and they don’t realise they all have the same starter. When we start to have the group reports, we can then start a sort of debate where we critique another group’s ideas. There is always more than one answer. Not all are relevant, but I can learn from the answers as well. Today you saw the Butterfly group of girls respond to the starter Critically thinking, we want to argue that … there are rocks on the hill, but also clay and water. Jack and Jill should not have gone up there to get water as it is too dangerous for kids. A grown-up should be doing it. These are the same girls who were reluctant to try the tumbling on the mats. They eventually did it and were not injured, but someone in the group is very cautious and timid and the others seem to be following her.

In the Evaluating and Reflecting stage, the students are required to link two or more concepts learned in the inquiry. In the above example from the Butterfly Group of girls, they were linking the need for personal safety with the injuries resulting from the task Jack and Jill had undertaken. They comprehended that the ground surface was a contributing factor in the injuries and that this was preventable if an adult went to get the water. During this stage, the teacher is tasked with linking the students’ prior knowledge with the evidence and the conclusion to make the learning experience relevant to the student. It is important that the student has a personal sense of achievement and agency in their learning. The teacher in this case study used a ‘word wall’ activity immediately after the lunch break to promote Reflection. She had divided the whiteboard into three sections and at the top of each section, she wrote either interesting, surprising, or unexpected. The students returned to the classroom expecting to do quiet reading. Instead of getting out their readers, the teacher explained that they were to “Sit-for-a-bit, and think of three things about Jack and Jill that were interesting, surprising, and unexpected. Then write the 3 things down”. A class discussion was held around the interesting, surprising and unexpected ideas. Not all ideas provided the teacher with insights into student thinking, however, she was pleased with a few of the contributions: The students are very insightful and think really well at times. We often don’t ask them about their thinking, but in an inquiry reflection it is clear they think a lot. There is no time to get them to reflect all the time. Doing it at the end is more revealing. My favourite ‘interesting’ idea was from Joshua who found the idea that the head can go first in a fall sometimes, but feet can go first in a different fall, and falls are different. Then what about Jenny’s ‘surprise’ idea? She was surprised that someone would build a well on top of a hill. She thought a tap would have been a better way to fill the bucket. Joey didn’t expect that pictures in books were actually made of anything. But then if the picture is a symbol of our world, like the hill was, then it is made of something, or it is meant to be something that it isn’t.

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

109

Communicating The final stage of the geographical inquiry is Communicating. Like Questioning, Communicating should be emphasised throughout the entire inquiry process. Students need to be constantly presenting their ideas and viewpoints. Students need to constantly explain their decisions, make predictions and use an ever-increasing vocabulary. Communication is about revealing ideas and understandings to another person or a group of people. The teacher nominates how the students communicate their conclusions to the geographical inquiry. The common choices are an oral or written report, a graphic or a multimedia presentation. The genre, purpose of the task, and the audience all need considering. In this case study, the teacher chose not to have her students to formally communicate their experiences via a report or presentation of the Jack and Jill geographical inquiry process and conclusions. As outlined above, the teacher had clearly stated classroom goals of fostering language and phrase development, of fostering critical thinking and argumentation around the content and encouraging the use of new vocabulary drawn from the targeted learning areas. The communication requirement was emphasised throughout the inquiry, and not as a culminating task to form an assessment piece. At various times during the inquiry, the students were preparing a wall poster onto which they described findings, illustrated fall movements and symbols. This wall provided a visual log of the iterative progress of exploring the ground surface of the hill, thus communicating the students’ progress in the geographical inquiry.

Discussion and Conclusion This chapter provided a description of the geographical inquiry literacy of one Year 2 teacher in an Australian classroom. The teacher described her planning and enactment intentions from her classroom goals, degree of teacher direction and instructional approach perspectives. Her inquiry-based teaching was successful as she intertwined her classroom goals, degree of teacher direction and instructional approach in such a way they developed the geographical language, skills and symbols of the inquiry in both herself and the students – which according to Kidman and Casinader (2017) and Shore et  al. (2009) is the geographical inquiry literacy required for successful inquiry-based teaching. The case study presented in this chapter revealed that inquiry-based practices in primary classrooms that are focusing on geographical topics can be highly satisfying learning experiences when the activities integrate with other learning areas. Primary aged students have a natural curiosity, so learner-centred pedagogies like inquiry-based learning develop the students’ skills to be critical thinkers and to plan and enact a journey of wonder. In this chapter, we saw the teacher develop geographical inquiry process skills with her Year 2 class of students. The teacher wanted

110

G. Kidman and D. Chakraborty

to provide her students with experiences to develop an awareness of their own ideas and those of their peers, and then to be able to relate the ideas to the question being investigated – “What was the hill made of?” There was a focus on vocabulary and critical thinking rather than on fact acquisition. Throughout the teaching time, the teacher monitored her students’ progress through questioning and observation. She had no need for a formal assessment task, as her main focus was on the development of skills and dispositions, best assessed over time. Teaching time was spent orienting the attention of the students to the inquiry process, refining the students’ understandings of the processes and task overall, and assisting with the selection of appropriate data and evidence. The teacher scaffolded the disciplinary ways of thinking – mirroring the process a geographer follows. The inquiry was housed in geography, but was interdisciplinary, drawing on a study of movements (trips, slips and tumbles) in physical education, symbols from science and geography, to respond to a question generated by a student in an English language class. Links between the disciplines were highlighted as were students’ explanations and interpretation. Earlier we stated this research was framed by Cooperrider and Srivastava’s (1987) appreciative inquiry framework that originated in the field of organisation leadership but has an important place in education. Cooperrider (n.p) stated that “instead of ‘problems to be solved’, human systems are ‘universes of strengths’ … The more we study ‘what gives life’ versus ‘what’s wrong’, the more we can move in the direction of or become what we study”. The Positive Principle – a component of the appreciative inquiry framework, emphasises positive questions amplifying the positive core, and provides the tools that allow us to look at the strengths of the teacher. Throughout the above case study, we underlined the instances where we saw the strengths of the teacher through her teaching practices. From these underlined strengths, we have created a set of five Geographical Inquiry Pedagogical Principles. Table 5 briefly explains each of these principles. These five pedagogical principles focus on geographical inquiry teaching and learning. Critical is the relationship between students and their learning environment, and their expectations towards skills and attitudes. The conceptualization of pedagogical principles reflects the teachers’ rich understanding of good teaching Table 5  Geographical inquiry pedagogical principles Pedagogical principles Personal Interest Respectful Productivity Learning Independence Intellectual Extension Reflection

Principles in action during the geographical inquiry Teacher uses a range of pedagogies to promote engagement and learning; draws on prior knowledge and acknowledges students’ wonder and curiosity Teacher promotes collaboration and positive relationships where effort is expected Teacher promotes students taking responsibility for their learning; being confident to take risks and learn from failure Teacher provides learning goals based on high expectations Teacher promotes reflection and self-assessment throughout the inquiry experience

Inquiry-Based Practices in Primary School Geography

111

practice in general. The five pedagogical principles increase our understanding of teachers’ pedagogical decision-making during a geographical inquiry. The descriptions and discourses presented in this chapter, summarised into these geographical inquiry pedagogical principles indicate that primary school teachers can provide rich reasoning contexts for their students using inquiry-based practices. The context is best interdisciplinary, but focused on one discipline, in this case, Geography. Together, the teacher and the students can reflect on the language and ideas being promoted in the lessons. The pedagogical routines employed by the teacher support the creation of rich and thoughtful reasoning in lessons that promote geographical knowledge creation and skill development.

References Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2015) F-6/7 Humanities and social sciences – concepts for developing geographical thinking. v8.1. https://docs.acara. edu.au/resources/F-­6_7_HASS_Concepts_for_developing_geographical_thinking.pdf Catling S, Willy T (2009) Teaching primary geography: QTS meeting the professional standards framework. Learning Matters Ltd., London Catling S, Willy T, Butler J (2013) Teaching geography for Australian schools. Hawker Brownlow Education, Moorabbin Cooperrider DL, Srivastava S (1987) Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. Res Organ Change Dev 1:129–169 French R, Marschall C (2018) Concept-based inquiry in action: strategies to promote transferable understanding. Corwin Press, California Halocha J (1998) Coordinating geography across the primary school. Routledge, London Kidman G, Casinader N (2017) Inquiry-based teaching and learning across disciplines: comparative theory and practice in schools. Palgrave Macmillan, London Martin F (2006) Teaching geography in primary schools. Chris Kington, Cambridge Maxim GW (2006) Dynamic social studies for constructivist classrooms: inspiring tomorrows social scientists, 8th edn. Pearson Shore BM, Birlean C, Walker CL, Ritchie KC, Labanca F, Aulls MW (2009) Inquiry literacy: a proposal for a neologism. Learn Landsc 3(1):139–154

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia Catherine Lang and Carolyn Quon

Abstract  In this chapter, the authors draw on the current Australian recommended curriculum to highlight and demonstrate areas that encourage teachers to include fieldwork in their primary classroom, their school grounds and their local area. The opportunities for fieldwork as a cross-curriculum priority are also presented and supported by literature that emphasizes the importance of fieldwork to build student creativity, confidence and independent learning opportunities. We acknowledge the administrative and economic overlays on teacher workload and planning to allow the implementation of fieldwork, as well as the need to adhere to safety and compliance policies. The authors posit that these should not be a deterrent to implementing fieldwork at every year level, and that it should be the norm, not the exception. Keywords  Primary geography fieldwork · Creativity · Digital technologies · Cross-curricula fieldwork

Introduction Fieldwork is an important aspect in teaching Geography. The discipline, by definition, is centred on an inquiry approach that encourages students to use ‘where, what, why, how and when’ questions about local, regional, national and international environments. The Australian Curriculum for primary schools has grouped Geography with History and Civics and Citizenship under the banner ‘HASS’, Human and Social Sciences.

C. Lang (*) Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] C. Quon A.C.T. Government Education, Canberra, A.C.T, Australia © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_8

113

114

C. Lang and C. Quon

The F–6/7 Australian Curriculum for Humanities and Social Sciences aims to ensure that students develop: • a sense of wonder, curiosity and respect about places, people, cultures and systems throughout the world, past and present, and an interest in and enjoyment of the study of these phenomena • key historical, geographical, civic and economic knowledge of people, places, values and systems, past and present, in local to global contexts • an understanding and appreciation of historical developments, geographic phenomena, civic values and economic factors that shape society, influence sustainability and create a sense of belonging • the capacity to use inquiry methods and skills, including questioning, researching using reliable sources, analysing, evaluating and communicating • dispositions required for effective participation in everyday life, now and in the future, including critical and creative problem-solving, informed decision making, responsible and active citizenship, enterprising financial behaviour and ethical reflection. (ACARA 2020)

It is important to point out that fieldwork is not explicit in the above aims, although maybe assumed and is recommended on the site, as is detailed later in this chapter. The professional body that supports Australian Geography teachers at all year levels emphasises the fundamental importance of fieldwork as follows: Fieldwork is the means by which students can engage and develop a deep understanding of geographical processes and enquiry. Fieldwork gives students (both individually and collaboratively) the opportunity to: • enhance their knowledge through observing, mapping, measuring and recording real-world phenomena • explore geographical processes that form and transform environments • use a range of geographical tools to assist in interpretation and decision-making • locate, select, organise and communicate geographical information • explore different perspectives relating to geographical issues (AGTA 2020)

Fieldwork can be defined as “any activity involving the observation and recording of information outside the classroom. It could be within the school grounds, around neighbouring areas, or more distant locations” (Maude 2014, p.  52). Fieldwork is an excellent vehicle for building the skills specific to Geography such as, but not limited to: • …methods of observation, interviewing, measurement (both in the field and in the laboratory) and monitoring; earth observation (as a means of data collection); • …techniques for analyzing, modelling and presenting special data; • Cartographic analysis (including interpretation of maps) … [and] • The ability to imagine other people and other places (Reynolds 2012, p. 375)

Equally important is the social aspect and whole-body experience that fieldwork provides, as Reynolds (2012), stated: “fieldwork offers the opportunity to engage all senses, smell, hearing, sight, touch and even taste, which is a reason why it engages so well and is so powerful in students’ memories” (p. 198). It is also possible to conduct fieldwork activities by bringing the outside world into the classroom. Catling et al. (2013) suggest that this can be done “through the use of photographs, film, artefacts and maps” (p. 97). More recently, studies have been completed in the use of digital resources for environmental science education,

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

115

to determine the benefits of digital nature (McCauley 2017). Student retention of these types of activities appears to be less than that gained from an actual physical experience. While McCauley commented that: “Perceptions of interconnection to nature-derived via virtual reality experiences have been recorded to persist for at least 1 week, although impact from real field trips may last a year” (p. 300), he also noted that in some cases digital substitution can be a valid choice of educators. As will be seen later in this chapter, the use of digital technology resources can bring the world inside the classroom and contribute to increased student engagement in activities. This type of fieldwork is certainly an option when administrative and economic factors may impinge on taking students outside of the school grounds. In this chapter, we will present an overview of primary geography fieldwork as outlined in The Australian Curriculum as well as some examples of how it has been enacted and experienced by a practising primary teacher in two different primary schools. We will begin with an overview of the current positioning of Geography within the primary curricula and how this may affect the subject’s position and time allocated to it in the school timetable. A selection of literature is presented to help the reader gain an understanding of the Australian education system, current primary teacher training requirements and the benefits of fieldwork, before providing two examples of enacted fieldwork experiences. The chapter also includes a discussion of some of the perceived barriers to conducting fieldwork outside the school grounds in Australian primary schools.

Fieldwork Opportunities Within Primary Years of Schooling The Australian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (ACARA) provides many online resources for current teachers. This includes student work samples that may be used by teachers for ideas for activities, including fieldwork experiences. These work samples can be analysed by teachers to help generate discussions within planning teams when constructing or reflecting on units of work and planning for fieldwork experiences for the year ahead. The following table provides some of the fieldwork topics drawn from the website (ACARA 2020). As can be seen, the scope of fieldwork begins in the local area and expands geographically as students progress through their primary years. Table 1 is followed by a more detailed explanation of each activity. In the Foundation year (called Kindergarten in some states and Prep in others) the local scale fieldwork taps into each students’ understanding of their own community. The suggested Community Walk can be completed by the class as a whole, or students may individually draw on their knowledge of their route to school. In Year 1 the fieldwork suggestion is extended to a local wetland, waterbody, or park. In some schools, students are able to walk to a local lagoon or wetland or take a short bus ride. If this is unattainable photographs or videos of a local waterbody may be analysed within class instead.

116

C. Lang and C. Quon

Table 1  Fieldwork opportunities (ACARA 2020) Year level Fieldwork activity Geographical concepts Foundation Community Walk Describe features of familiar places and recognise that places Map can be represented on maps. Observe the familiar features of places and represent these features and their location on pictorial maps and models. Reflect on and suggest ways they can care for a familiar place. Year 1 The Local Introducing concepts of scale and managed features, Lagoon constructed and natural. Identify and describe the features of places and their location at a local scale. Describe how places can be cared for and reflect on their learning to suggest ways they can care for places. Year 2 Our visit to the Reinforcing scale and geographic divisions. Recognise that Park places have a different meaning for different people and why significant features of places should be preserved. Record objects on labelled maps. Year 3 My Place (local Describe the diverse characteristics of different places at the suburb, or town) local scale and identify and describe similarities and differences between the characteristics of these places. Record and represent data in different formats, including labelled maps using basic cartographic conventions. Year 4 Environmental Record and represent data using cartographic conventions. Investigation Propose individual action in response to a local geographical challenge and identify some possible effects of their proposed action. Explain the characteristics of places in different locations at Year 5 What type of local to national scales. place is Mackay Identify and describe the interconnections between people and Harbor? Excursion Report. the human and environmental characteristics of places, and between components of environments. Identify the effects of these interconnections on the characteristics of places and environments Describe the location of places in selected countries in absolute Year 6 The World – inquiry fieldwork and relative terms. Describe and explain the diverse characteristics of places in different location from local to project global scales. Describe the interconnections between people in different places identify factors that influence and change places and affect people. Interpret maps, data and other information to identify, describe and compare spatial distributions, patterns and trends, to infer relationships and draw conclusions. Use geographical terminology and digital technologies in a range of communication forms.

A work sample in the Year 2 resources on the ACARA site, refers to a local park. There is also a survey activity in the curriculum at this level. While this is not presented as a fieldwork opportunity it could be adapted through visiting locations that have different environments in close proximity. For example, the Botanical Gardens of the town may have a rainforest area, grassed area, a desert area, a wetland or a pond. Students gather data about human use and activities in each environment. This suggestion may complement an integrated Geography/Math unit of work

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

117

through mapping and scale activities, as well as numbers and counting. For example, students may survey others in the class and ask a specified number how they would use each environment type, what activities would they do there? They then combine this knowledge in a short report or poster, using their mathematical and geographical skills. The fieldwork examples provided for students in Year 3 (9 years old) is still focused at a local scale although now expanded to the suburb or town. An integrated English/Geography inquiry unit may be planned to provide an opportunity for students to apply explicitly taught persuasive writing skills in context. There may be an opportunity for fieldwork to visit a new development that requires land clearing or has identified environmental impacts. Students may be able to identify improvements that could be made to how a place is being used for the betterment of the community, identify stakeholders and write persuasive letters to relevant organisations or government departments to call for improvement or change, thus writing with a purpose and relevant audience. Fieldwork can also be conducted through a guided walk or provided through local maps with grid overlays. By Year 4 fieldwork can be combined with both individual action and sustainability issues. It can occur within the school grounds or the wider community. One suggestion provided is for each student to carry out a waste management survey over a week. This could be within the school grounds after the lunch break, or at the end of the day, at a nearby shopping area, or within their home. Year 4 is progressing from local to national scale so further inquiry can occur into national waste management, or connect with another year 4 in another suburb, city or state to compare findings or find out what they are doing to reduce waste. As previously stated, these work samples from The Australian Curriculum can help to generate ideas for teachers however some are more worksheet based. Such as, when identifying features and locating points on a map using coordinates. In these cases, a relevant learning experience would be to use a local or familiar map instead of a mock one. To further enhance the learning experience a local suburb walking excursion could be undertaken where students have a map with some features included and others omitted. The omitted features may already be present in the legend, so students are analysing their path/direction along the way and are adding using an appropriate scale. The example, Excursion Report, provided for Year 5 details a project that includes fieldwork and inquiry. Students visit and take photos to include in their report. They observe characteristics, human-made and natural features. The report includes latitude and longitude, rainfall data across a year, a climate graph, a map showing what Mackay Harbour is used for, why it is used for so many purposes and a reflection of what they learnt on the excursion. After the excursion, classroom research can be carried out at school to complete the inquiry project. A physical excursion such as the one suggested, to conduct fieldwork has been shown to increase student engagement and provides a connection to the place for geographical concepts to make better sense. The location is variable depending on the school location. It is important to ensure that it will generate interest in the world and the impacts humans have upon it. When the limitations of time frames, administrative and economic costs

118

C. Lang and C. Quon

may hinder such fieldwork experiences from occurring, videos and other interactive technologies may need to be used as a substitute. In Year 6 students are at varying of levels of puberty and have varying levels of intrinsic motivation. An experienced teacher knows that solely using worksheets for global investigations can reduce student engagement. The geographical focus reaches global scale topics, including country comparisons and migration to Australia. These topics can be integrated with other subject areas and utilise interactive online resources, particularly for map creation. Such an example will be provided in the latter section of this chapter. Teachers and teaching teams often analyse these ACARA work samples to develop their own fieldwork plans and create rubrics for assessing student skill levels at different standards. If the work sample provided is of a satisfactory standard then relevant comments and outcomes are of ‘At level (C grade)’. Adjustments can be made for ‘Above Average (B grade)’ and so on. These rubrics are often shared with students prior to commencing their projects so that they understand what skills they need to demonstrate. Students may also notice areas where they need to learn more, and this could provide intrinsic motivation to certain students. Moderation between the teaching team of a selection of work samples from the final projects of the cohort uses this jointly defined rubric as a tool.

Additional Fieldwork Resources In addition to the ACARA work samples and online resources, there are several opportunities for teachers to undertake self-identified professional learning to explore possible fieldwork sites. For example, most states provide educator passes to national and state museums. In the Australian Capital Territory, there is the National Capital Teachers Pass that allows teachers to enter venues and explore learning opportunities for their classes. In Victoria there are teacher passes available for Museums, including Melbourne Museum and Sovereign Hill, an historic goldfield site. In New South Wales there are teacher passes to Taronga Zoo and Sydney Living Museums available. These venues often have a resident educator who can assist teachers to explore new ways for teaching geographical concepts. There are also a number of private organisations that may assist in the planning and scope of excursions that relieve teachers of the administrative overload, however, these incur economic costs. Australia has an abundance of unique natural habitats and an extensive coastline and river systems that, depending on the physical location of a school, are readily available for low-cost fieldwork explorations. In the primary curriculum, Geography is included within the Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS) curriculum. History, Civics and Citizenship are also in the HASS discipline. Geography must therefore compete for space within a crowded curriculum. It is not uncommon for one semester to be devoted to Geography and then the other to History at each year level in primary schools. Civics and Citizenship are also embedded within units of inquiry. Mathematics and English are often

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

119

planned with topics that complement the outcomes of Geography and History units, as demonstrated in the fieldwork example provided. This holistic and integrated approach however requires teachers to have a detailed understanding of learning requirements for each year level across each subject area sequence. In Australia, most primary school teachers are trained generalists, that is, in their teacher training, they are expected to be capable of delivering all subjects apart from a few areas (such as a Language other than English, Music or Specialist Physical Education). Of course, all teachers are expected to be capable literacy and numeracy educators. Only recently has Australia determined that primary teachers should adopt a specialisation in their teacher training courses. This is particularly important in relation to teaching Geography because “Primary teachers are responsible for seven of the nine years in which the subject will be compulsory in the majority of schools … few will have done more than a minimal study of geography at the tertiary level” (Maude 2014 p. 1). The pedagogical approaches to teaching HASS are similar and have been successful in embedding a scaffolded inquiry-based approach to student learning. Teaching is an evolving profession, responsive to the needs of society. The authors have noticed that geographical concepts are becoming more complex in the 21st century, with a growing focus on ‘taking environmental action’ and undertaking national and global scale research in the latter years of primary school.

Cross-Curriculum Priority The Australian curriculum has a cross-curriculum priority for the teaching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures. This means that this must be considered and embedded in units where possible. In the Humanities and Social Sciences, the Australian Curriculum states: The diverse cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples are explored through their: • long and continuous strong connections with Country/Place and their economic, cultural, spiritual and aesthetic value of place, including the idea of custodial responsibility. Students examine the influence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples on the environmental characteristics of Australian places, and the different ways in which places are represented. • experiences before, during and after European colonisation including the nature of contact with other peoples, and their progress towards recognition and equality. In particular, students investigate the status and rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, past and present, including civic movements for change, the contribution of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples to Australian society, and contemporary issues. • exploration of how groups express their particular identities and come to understand how group belonging influences perceptions of others (ACARA 2020).

120

C. Lang and C. Quon

The first of these areas relates strongly to Geography fieldwork activities, the strong cultural and continuous connection with the land, as will be seen in one of the case studies presented at the end of the chapter. With these curriculum directives, there is an increasing need for primary school teachers to work in teams to analyse, collaborate and be confidently creative when devising relevant fieldwork experiences in Geography.

Making a Case for Geography Fieldwork in the Literature Geography fieldwork is a critical and necessary component of geography teaching. Researchers have analysed its place in the curriculum and noticed changes that have occurred in its implementation in different countries. Foskett (1999) reports that while it used to be an accepted part of the UK curriculum, since the 1990s when ‘the pressures of safety legislation and financial constraint have been a negative pressure on it’ (p.  159), and it now mainly resides in senior high school. He states that Geography fieldwork is ‘largely ignored’ or only marginally referred to in many European countries (p. 159). He argues for the inclusion of fieldwork at all levels of schooling and provides a three-point case to substantiate this. These three points are related to how evidence of experience from teachers demonstrates its value in the learning process. The second point suggests that fieldwork is supported by educational psychology and that “experiential learning enhances pupil learning outcomes” and lastly that it enhances “cognitive and affective gain” (p. 160). He makes the point that: “Geography is a ‘small fish in the curriculum ocean” and teachers must be able to argue for the position of fieldwork in the curriculum to stop it from being “devoured by the sharks of integrated social sciences or the predatory core subject of Maths, Science and Language” (p. 162). This is an important observation not lost in the Australian context where Geography and the associated fieldwork sits in the Humanities and Social Sciences curriculum in primary schools, and in 2020 where Maths and Sciences are promoted through a push for STEM teaching at all levels of schooling. Another UK based researcher, Nundy (1999), investigated cognitive and affective learning of upper primary students gained from a residential fieldwork experience. He was able to compare the learning outcomes from two groups of students who completed the same unit of work. One group was classroom-based (control group), the other in the field (p.  190). Using quantitative instruments in a quasi-­ experimental setting, and qualitative case study methods, he evaluated pre and post learnings of each group using existing and verified survey tools. Using ‘between groups t-tests’ he was able to show a significant positive improvement in cognitive learning outcomes in the students who had completed the fieldwork. This study also showed a more positive self-concept and greater affective learning (p. 192). This experiment, though small, provides statistical evidence of the importance of students undertaking fieldwork in primary school. In the words of Nundy, it should be seen as “pedagogically indispensable” (p. 197).

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

121

More recently, Australians Lloyd et al. (2018) reiterated the positions taken by earlier researches. In their case study report, they analysed the benefits of placed based outdoor learning classes. While not solely applied to geography fieldwork, they do state outdoor learning increased the levels of student engagement and promoted more positive behaviours for learning. Students were more attentive and responsive to instruction. In addition they state that ‘there were no major behavioural incidents experienced during outdoor learning… supported by the school based behavioural data, which recorded in the class there were 79 behaviour incidents in the classroom and zero while in outdoor learning”( p. 165). These researchers extend the argument by stating that children became more independent learners in the outdoor lessons, learning leadership, compromise and sharing skills as well as interacting in a different level with their teachers (p. 166). They posit that place based learning should be a regular pedagogy in all primary schools because of its positive impact “on children’s academic attainment, especially in terms of vocabulary development, meaningful writing, and oral language skills… to promote social skills, leadership, resilience, and the development of independence” (p. 166). Similarly, Casinder and Kidman (2018) presented an argument for the ‘fieldwork imperative’. They stated that: Unlike Science, in which fieldwork is often a highly guided and selective process based on testing of specific interactions … Geography in the field is concerned with the entirety of all that exists in a place. Its data gathering, although planned, is capable of being modified in order to respond to what is found to exist in a place and is not limited by a bounded reliance on what is perceived or expected to exist. It is able to combine the objectivity of a scientific data investigation with a reflexive engagement by the student in the process of studying what is sustainable and what is not (p. 11).

In the same article they argue that “while national and international environmental and sustainability education policy argues for an interdisciplinary approach, it would have a more solid educational housing in Geography than in the Science curriculum, where it currently tends to reside” (p. 13). These researchers emphasize the holistic value of geography fieldwork in the primary curriculum, stressing the inquiry-based interdisciplinary approach and how it benefits students as well as promoting a positive connection to local and wider communities.

I ssues That Complicate the Implementation of Geography Fieldwork Barriers to implementing fieldwork into primary classrooms can be related to safety, risk avoidance, administrative overload, time and economic costs. This section touches on some of the main aspects of these issues and how they can and often do, discourage classroom teachers from taking their students into the field.

122

C. Lang and C. Quon

Policy Requirements Australia is not considered a litigious society, however, there is a growing risk aversion associated with out-of-classroom activities, which of course applies to fieldwork. Accidents and deaths have occurred during school outdoor education camps as well as during activities at school. All Australian teachers have a duty of care over the students and thus need to ensure all risks have been analysed and assessed. Maude (2014) claims fieldwork is ‘harder for teachers to undertake in recent years because of our national overreaction to any form of risks’ (p. 52). The authors do not necessarily agree with this claim of overreaction. We acknowledge that there is the need for fieldwork activities to be structured and purposeful, not free-range, particularly with primary school children. For example, the Australian Capital Territory’s Excursion Policy website is quite detailed (ACT Education 2020). The main person responsible for ensuring policy is followed is the School Principal, through the teacher-in-charge of each fieldwork experience. The policy states that the fieldwork or excursion must be directly related to the curriculum and that parental consent must be sought for all these activities. Parents must also be informed of costs, with the school ensuring that all costs are covered and students unable to pay can be accommodated. The school must collect suitable medical information, ensure adequate supervision related to the number of students, their maturity and the activities being undertaken while on the excursion, fieldwork.

Administrative Compliance There is a great deal of administration needed prior to taking students out of the school grounds for any activity, including Geography fieldwork. There is also the imperative that this is completed in a timely manner. The extra paperwork creates an extra workload for busy teachers. There is a need to clearly consider and manage risk, ensuring that each fieldwork experience has a risk management plan. In some cases, buses or transport needs to be pre-booked, which incurs a cost. If there is more than one class at that year level, most schools will have two to three classes at each year level, there is a need for collaboration with fellow teachers. Catling et al. (2013) list some of these concerns: Organising successful fieldwork pay attention to Adult/pupil ratio; Clear objectives and expected outcomes; organise the class into groups with the allocated tasks; thoroughly check the area prior to the visit and carry out a risk assessment; Location/ Hazard/ Event/ Risk/ Action to be taken to reduce risk/ Action to be taken in the event of occurrence. (p. 103)

The A.C.T. Education excursion policy in itself may complicate a teacher’s desire to plan and undertake fieldwork with their students. Specifying a Teacher in Charge may also act as a barrier to organising fieldwork, because responsibilities may lie

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

123

with a team of teachers who have planned the cohort’s teaching scope and sequence for several classes of students at this year level. The Teacher in Charge must accept responsibility for the paperwork and administrative load. This is a responsibility that many might not feel comfortable with doing independently for the first time, or if they have had negative administrative experiences in the past, or are feeling workload pressures, noting that Australian primary school teachers spend more face-to-­ face time in the classroom than many other countries, according to OECD data Australian primary school teachers spend 866 hours per year classroom teaching. Our education system is often compared with Finland, yet Finnish teachers spend only 677 hours per year classroom teaching. Teachers in Russia, Korea, Japan, Canada for example also spend fewer hours in the classroom (OECD 2018). They may not want to volunteer to take on this role independently. In the author’s experience, a reduced workload time is not offered to a teacher who takes on the role of organising an excursion. Any out-of-class activities “need careful planning and usually a risk assessment” (Reynolds 2012, p. 198). The purpose of each excursion must be assessed for the suitability of the site and for the age and development level of students. Administration associated with the excursion includes school approval, notes home to parents, first-aid officer attendance, records of any medications students are taking, class attendance roles, bookings, permission slips monitoring and collection. In many schools Learning Support Assistants are needed for students who are diagnosed with additional learning needs. There is also the curriculum preparation, pre and post excursion activities, sourcing of any additional equipment such as measuring containers, cameras, and last of all contingency plans for weather conditions for example. Given these many compliance requirements, it is not surprising that teachers decide to carry out fieldwork within the school grounds or the classroom, or not at all.

Economic Issues While primary schools have a budget for each year level in accordance with the number of students in the class and the socio-economic status of the school, decisions are often made at the executive level on how that budget is best spent. The author’s experience in the government school system is that there is an effort made to accommodate all students to ensure that those from low socio-economic or otherwise disadvantaged families are receiving the same educational experiences when at school. Keeping in mind that all disciplines are competing for the same pool of funds, strong arguments need to be made for the focus of the funds to go to Geography fieldwork. In the case of using digital technology resources for geography fieldwork (see Case Study 2 below), many Australian schools have a 1-1 device ratio. Students can bring in a device of their choosing from home or they can hire one for the year for a much smaller fee. It has been experienced that students from families that need support can loan out a device free of charge each day from the school library or an

124

C. Lang and C. Quon

arrangement may be made directly between the school and the families. The classroom teacher needs to be aware of which students in her class need this added support to avoid them feeling excluded in any way.

Case Studies of Enacted Fieldwork Author 2 is a current primary school teacher in the Australian Capital Territory. Her first degree was a Bachelor of Environmental Science, followed by a Graduate Diploma in Environmental Law, before completing a Bachelor of Teaching as a mature student. She has taught in primary schools for 5 years, in two different schools with allocation to different classes each year from Year 1 through to Year 6. The following case studies are taken from units of work developed by the author and her teaching team over this time.

Case Study 1: Years 1 and 2 (Composite Class): Journey Maps The following unit of work was developed and delivered in an Australian Year 1 and 2 composite class, as well as when the author was on an international exchange teaching placement for a short period of time to primary school students in Shanghai. It extended the ACARA recommended fieldwork of a Community Walk Map (Foundation) and included the recommended concepts of scale, managed features, geographic divisions and how places can have different meanings for different people suggested through the Lagoon Walk, Year 1 and Our Visit to the Park Year 2. The unit was developed to integrate the teaching of Geography concepts with Mathematical concepts, English skills, Art and the cross-curriculum priority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures. The aim in developing the integrated unit was to enable an engaging experience for students to spark their curiosity and allow them to apply concepts of local scale, location and features of places as well as creating and labelling maps with perspective. The school was visited by an Aboriginal storyteller of the Wiradjuri country, to share information about artefacts and provide students with the ability to touch and ask about them. This provided the spark to introduce the unit of work and is an example of a fieldwork experience within the school grounds. Wirudjuri are the neighbouring people inland of Ngunnawal country, on which the school was built. The Aboriginal storyteller introduced “songlines, the story of the land”, to share an understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander connection to Country. The students were also introduced to indigenous map symbols, that are used in Aboriginal artworks, (see Fig.  1) and the associated explanations over a series of lessons. Students were instructed to use these to create individual maps to describe their journey from home to school, titled Journey Maps.

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

125

Fig. 1  Indigenous Map Symbols – student handout. Artlandish (2020), Central Art Aboriginal Art Store (2020)

A mixed modal approach was used to deliver this unit of work. There was a presentation, physical artefacts that could be handled, listening skills, discussion and creative activity. These contributed to building student understanding and meeting curriculum aims. The activity was an opportunity for students to use geographical directional language when discussing the position of features and provided an experience to highlight the historical importance and connection with oral communication. Numeracy concepts of number and distance were reinforced through the mapping exercise, and literacy concepts were introduced through a verbal recording created by each student as they provided a voice-over that described their journey from home to school by interpreting their own map. Figures 2 and 3 are samples of student Journey Maps. This unit of work was also delivered to primary students in Shanghai when one of the authors was on an international teaching placement. While unable to introduce the unit via an Aboriginal storyteller, the author was able to communicate the meanings of the aboriginal symbols by modelling the creation of a journey map from the accommodation to the school. Colleagues who permanently taught within the school wrote and translated for the students as they asked what some English definitions meant. The journey map instructions were understood by these young Chinese students who had English as a second language as it was an activity that required them to make connections to what they see on their journey. It was in context with their life, their travel on a daily basis to school.

126

C. Lang and C. Quon

Fig. 2  Student Journey Map sample 1

Fig. 3  Student Journey Map sample 2

This unit of work has been shared between schools, and when the author moved to a different school, the fieldwork unit was verified by the school’s Indigenous Education Worker before being introduced in the new community. The unit can be adapted for new locations and reinforces the importance of geography fieldwork in an integrated curriculum while emphasising connections to Country.

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

127

Case Study 2: Year 6: Bringing the World into the Classroom An international excursion to compare two cities is not economically feasible for entire cohorts of a year level in the majority of primary schools. Embracing digital options can be a successful alternative to showcase how Geography is about the world we live in and our place in it. This unit of work that uses digital technologies and several freely available digital tools encourages primary school students to explore, inquire, consider different sustainability issues in countries in our region and suggest educated action for improvement. The increased use of technology and devices for communication, connection and learning is pronounced in Year 6 students. Using digital platforms for ‘field work’ experiences are effective because the students enjoy using their own or school-­ supplied devices. In some classes, the use of Virtual Reality goggles to show the features and landscapes of different places around the world generated engagement and wonder. The medium of delivery enhances the method of instruction greatly. Applications such as WeVideo for News Reports on Natural Disasters and Google Sites to communicate information between peers and also the teacher provides opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning, their creativity and have proven to increase student engagement in the classroom. This fieldwork example was delivered in a school where students had their own devices and used many Google applications. In this unit of work, Google MyMaps provided students with a way to collate the data they had discovered through researching different countries on the internet and encouraged creativity. Students were instructed to include images, data and text in their research project. The Learning intention of the unit of work was to increase knowledge about Asia, and the relation of different Asian countries to Australia. The skills of researching and communicating were exercised during this task. The curriculum outcomes targeted were “The geographical diversity of the Asia region and the location of its major countries in relation to Australia” and “Differences in the economic, demographic and social characteristics of countries across the world” (ACARA 2020). Year 6 students are in general able to work more independently than in earlier years, and many thrive on being given the freedom to research and show their individual creativity through this exercise (Fig. 4). In this multi-cultural classroom, students engaged in the task due to the creative use of digital resources and many happily shared information about their own family’s country of origin. This led to a buzz of active communication while work was being completed and a sense of pride at being able to present their research in a professional interactive digital format. When comparing this type of activity to one of reading and then creating an information report or using worksheets to complete the increased level of engagement was pronounced. The ability to use imagery and/ or text to show the information also helped to differentiate the task to make it accessible to all (Figs. 5 and 6). Students of today live in an interconnected society where they are confident in using digital technologies to communicate. A classroom teacher needs to embrace

128

C. Lang and C. Quon

Instructions

General Information

Label the regions:

When you have finished pinning the countries, attach some videos, pictures and general information for each region. ● Population ● Describe features of the landscape ● Life Expectancy ● Natural Disaster

ޮ South-East Asia ޮ South Asia ޮ West Asia ޮ East Asia

Pin the countries: Pin at least two major countries in each of the regions. *Don’t forget to pin Australia.

Fig. 4  Sample of Instruction sheet provided to students

Fig. 5  Sample of a ‘pinned’ map

this and teach students to navigate the wealth of information that is available online. This includes a need to teach about how search engines work, the reliability of sources, and navigating web sites to scan for information that is accurate and relevant to the research task. The need for students to have access to the internet and devices for this set task is paramount. The use of devices within schools is varied in Australia. Some schools embrace 1:1 devices and set work through the Google classroom after explicit teaching and activities. Others have laptop trolleys that are shared between classes and used for specific activities or tasks.

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

129

Fig. 6  Sample of a submission from a year 6 student

These two case studies present examples of enacted fieldwork in an Australian primary classroom. In each case, Geography fieldwork concepts are presented and enhanced while cross-curriculum priorities are also satisfied. The experience of the author who delivered these units is that the use of digital technologies brought an enhanced level of student engagement into the Year 6 project, that would not have existed if the activity was restricted to workbooks.

Conclusion In this chapter we presented an overview of primary geography fieldwork obtained when analysing samples from the Australian National Curriculum as well as experienced by a practising primary teacher in two different primary schools. We provided an overview of the position of fieldwork within the primary HASS curricula and how this may affect the time allocated to the subject in the school timetable. There is strong support for the advantages of geography fieldwork to student learning both in the literature and in the enacted case study experiences. Despite the administrative and sometimes economic barriers that affect primary geography fieldwork, creativity in an integrated unit of work as well as the use of digital resources can ensure that fieldwork becomes pedagogically indispensable.

130

C. Lang and C. Quon

The tensions around fieldwork timing, administration and costs perhaps result in missed opportunities. However, creative and experienced teachers can combat this through an engaging integrated curriculum focus that gains the attention of school executives who are indeed responsible for the budget. The fluidity of the primary curriculum and its responsiveness to different and changing education foci such as the current focus on STEM or STEAM may also impact on fieldwork opportunities. As Nundy (1999) so eloquently stated, the rapacious core subjects must not be permitted to dominate the curriculum. The authors acknowledge the limitations and barriers of implementing fieldwork, however, the research presents a strong case for it to be the norm, not an extension activity or exception but an imperative in all geography teaching. The research also shows that students develop holistically through fieldwork experiences, establishing skills to make them more independent learners, developing their vocabulary as well as resilience. The more that students can personally experience the outside world, the stronger their learning experience will be. It is our recommendation that teaching teams at all year levels in primary schools need identify fieldwork experiences in their geography units at the planning meetings that start each school year, because currently this is not the norm, nor directed through the ACARA curriculum. Both authors acknowledge a bias for fieldwork and a passion for positioning place-based inquiry learning pedagogies into their teaching.

References Artlandish (2020) Symbolism in Australian art. Accessed at: https://www.aboriginal-­art-­australia. com/aboriginal-­art-­library/symbolism-­in-­australian-­indigenous-­art/ Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2020) Humanities and Social Sciences. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-­10-­curriculum/humanities-­and-­ social-­sciences/. Accessed Jan 2020 Australian Geography Teachers Association (2020) AGTA’s geospace, fieldwork. http://geogspace. net.au/index.php. Accessed Jan 2020 ACT Government, Education (2020) Excursion policy. https://www.education.act.gov.au/publications_and_policies/School-­and-­Corporate-­Policies/school-­activities/excursions/excursions-­ policy. Accessed Jan 2020 Casinder N, Kidman G (2018) Fieldwork, sustainability and environment: the centrality of geographical inquiry. Aust J Environ Educ. 34(1), 1–17. https://doi-­org.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu. au/10.1017/aee.2018.12 Catling S, Willy T, Butler J (2013) Teaching primary geography for Australian schools. Hawker Brownlow Education Moorabbin, Victoria, Australia. ISBN: 9781743306758 Central Art Aboriginal Art Store (2020) Aboriginal symbols glossary. Accessed at: http://www. aboriginalartstore.com.au/aboriginal-­art-­culture/aboriginal-­symbols-­glossary/ Foskett N (1999) Forum: fieldwork in the geography curriculum  – international perspectives and research issues. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 8(2):159–163. https://doi. org/10.1080/10382049908667603 Lloyd AS, Truong S, Gray T (2018) Take the class outside! A call for place-based outdoor learning in the Australian primary school curriculum. Curric Perspect 38:163–167. https://doi. org/10.1007/s41297-­018-­0050-­1

Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia

131

Maude A (2014) Understanding and teaching the Australian curriculum: geography for primary schools. Hawker Brownlow Education Moorabbin, Victoria. ISBN: 9781760011710 McCauley DJ (2017) Digital nature: are field trips a thing of the past? Expand the reach of science education using games and simulations but choose tools wisely. Sci Educ 358(6361):298–300 Nundy S (1999) The fieldwork effect: the role and impact of fieldwork in the upper primary school. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 8(2):190–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382049908667608 OECD Data (2018) Teaching hours. Accessed at https://data.oecd.org/eduresource/teaching-­hours. htm. Jan 2020 Reynolds R (2012) Teaching history, geography and SOSE in the primary school. Oxford University Press, Melbourne

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography Sarah Witham Bednarz, Injeong Jo, and Euikyung Shin

Abstract  This chapter draws heavily from the cognitive and learning sciences literature on spatial thinking in young children (up to age 11 or 12) to present contemporary understandings of the role of spatial thinking in the acquisition of key language and mathematical skills as well as geographical understandings and abilities. First, we offer definitions of spatial thinking developed by geographers and cognitive scientists. Next, we summarise current research on the value of explicit spatial thinking experiences on young learners. There is an emerging consensus that spatial thinking is fundamental to later success in math, science, and geography. Spatial thinking is enhanced by spatial activities, playful learning, and spatial language. Spatial games, such as block building and assembling jigsaw puzzles, are often accompanied by spatial language, which, in turn, is often accompanied by gestures. Games provide important informal learning activities for young children, and spatial gameplay has been found to relate to the development of spatial skills. Primary geography educators are called upon to teach spatial thinking in clear ways to address known gaps in spatial abilities based on socio-economic status, gender, and other factors. Strategies to enhance spatial thinking instruction, including using a spatial thinking taxonomy to evaluate the spatiality of instructional materials and activities, are discussed. Keywords  Spatial thinking · Primary education · Geography education · Mapping

S. W. Bednarz (*) Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA e-mail: [email protected] I. Jo Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA E. Shin Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_9

133

134

S. W. Bednarz et al.

Introduction Much of the excitement about spatial thinking in the geography community has focused on its role in supporting the use of geospatial technologies such as remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS). The seminal study Learning to Think Spatially (2006) identified GIS to support spatial thinking. This connection between spatial thinking and technologies has led many geography education researchers to emphasise that context, perhaps to exclude other important affordances of spatial thinking, and may have skewed research to teaching and learning with older students, those ablest to use geospatial technologies. In this chapter, we intend to expand the discussion of spatial thinking in geography education by looking beyond technology-driven studies in our discipline to examine more fundamental reasons why spatial thinking is essential, especially in young learners. Our thinking draws heavily from the cognitive and learning sciences literature on spatial thinking in young children (up to age 11 or 12). This literature explores contemporary understandings of the role of spatial thinking in the acquisition of key language and mathematical skills and geographical understandings and abilities. First, we present definitions of spatial thinking developed by geographers and cognitive scientists and discuss ways to measure it. Next, we summarise current research on the value of explicit spatial thinking experiences on young learners. There is an emerging consensus that spatial thinking is fundamental to success in mathematics, science, engineering, and geography. We discuss the implications of these findings for primary educators. In conclusion, we explore strategies to enhance spatial thinking instruction, including using a spatial thinking taxonomy to evaluate the spatiality of instructional materials and activities.

Definitions of Spatial Thinking To discuss spatial thinking and recommend ways to develop it, we first must define it. This is, however, not simple. Is spatial thinking the same as spatial ability? How does one break down specific spatial skills that are components of spatial thinking? How do educators operationalise constructs of spatial thinking to develop effective teaching strategies, measures of performance, and learning progressions? Many geographers use the definition of spatial thinking suggested in Learning to Think Spatially (2006). Specifically, it defines spatial thinking as the use of spatial concepts, spatial representations, and processes of reasoning to conceptualise and solve problems. Following this definition, spatial thinking involves visualising and interpreting data about space encoded and stored in memory (Sinton 2011; Uttal 2000). This definition emphasises language (knowing and using spatial concepts such as location, distance, scale), understanding spatial representations such as maps, graphics, and diagrams, and the application of these to problem-solving, both personal and academic. This is related to developing a spatial habit of mind or the

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography

135

predilection to think spatially and the skills required to engage in reasoning this way (Kim and Bednarz 2013). However, cognitive scientists have focused more on spatial ability than thinking per se. Linn and Petersen (1985) identified three distinct components of spatial ability: spatial perception, mental rotation, and spatial visualisation. Spatial perception is the ability to understand spatial relationships concerning one’s own body, that is, to accurately perceive objects, routes, or spatial configurations. It is measured by instruments such as the water-level test. Mental rotation, in contrast, is the ability to mentally rotate two-dimensional or three-dimensional objects dynamically. Mental rotation is often measured by asking people to identify matching shapes presented in different orientations. Spatial visualisation is again a discreet skill generally defined as manipulating spatial information. It is estimated through numerous tasks like the hidden figures test or the paper folding task. In the hidden figures test, one locates a simple figure embedded within a complex figure. The paper folding task is somewhat different; individuals must mentally imagine folding a two-dimensional pattern into a representation of a three-dimensional box or mentally unfolding a three-dimensional box into a 2-dimensional pattern. These are two distinct types of tasks yet purportedly measure spatial visualisation. Thus, this description of spatial ability – and the ability to measure it – is both complex and vague. In an attempt to better conceptualise spatial ability and spatial thinking, yet align with previous work such as Linn and Petersen’s, Uttal et al. (2013) devised a classification system consisting of two dimensions. The first dimension examines the characteristics of an object and whether one considers the nature of the object itself (intrinsic information) or the nature of the object in relation to other objects (extrinsic information). The second dimension considers the object’s mobility, whether it is static or dynamic, and what happens when moved. These dimensions establish a two-by-two matrix of spatial skills at a fine enough grain at which each (intrinsic-­ static, intrinsic dynamic, extrinsic-static, extrinsic-dynamic) can be measured. It is an intrinsic-static skill to see an object and comprehend its shape and structure, measurable by an embedded figures test. In contrast, it is an intrinsic-dynamic skill to be able to place that object into a complex configuration, to transform that object mentally or to visualise it in different ways. For example, as it would look in cross-­ section. This skill can be measured by several tests, including the mental rotations test. Extrinsic-static tasks require representing relations among many objects at a different scale. In contrast, extrinsic-dynamic tasks require one to imagine the relations changing, for example, by changing perspective or seeing an environment from a different position. Both are measurable by different tests, including the water level test (extrinsic-static skills) and the three-mountain test (extrinsic-dynamic skills). Research indicates that these skills are distinct and may not be mutually shared. An individual good at intrinsic-static skills, gifted in visualising an object, such as an artist, has skills quite different from someone, such as a geographer, who has good intrinsic-dynamic skills and can readily visualise spatially (Kozhevnikov et al. 2005). While there is some criticism of the Uttal et al. conceptualisation of spatial abilities and skills (Newcombe 2016), it still affords us a straightforward way to think

136

S. W. Bednarz et al.

about spatial thinking that aligns with the definition familiar to geographers. And most importantly, this matrix has afforded an understanding that spatial skills are malleable; that is, they can be improved, in women and men, at any age, with permanent and transferable results and in a range of educational contexts (Uttal et al. 2013). This is important since, generally, women perform less well than men in many measures of spatial ability. It further provides geography educators with a clear sense of the potential learning progressions that pupils may have to master to become more spatially skilled, a topic we discuss in a later section.

The Value of Spatial Thinking Spatial thinking is the current focus of considerable research among cognitive and learning scientists, particularly those interested in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, the so-called STEM disciplines. As noted previously, spatial thinking is correlated with STEM achievement (Liben 2006; Wai et al. 2009). Using spatial concepts and making and interpreting spatial representations, mentally and physically, facilitate comprehension of STEM concepts (Uttal and Cohen 2012). Spatial thinking, it is posited, may serve as a gatekeeper to access the disciplines that depend on spatial skills such as geography and mathematics. This is of interest to educators committed to widening participation in STEM, including geography, noting that individual differences such as gender and socio-economic status influence spatial ability. Therefore, there is a great deal of interest among researchers in understanding the development of spatial abilities in young learners, specifically, when specific spatial skills such as mental rotation first develop, how these skills evolve, and what types of interventions and activities may promote their development (Hawes et al. 2015). There is concern among this research community that spatial thinking has been neglected in early education contexts despite its connections to performance in a range of subjects, including the arts and sports. The studies we reviewed primarily researched one of six areas: the role of spatial language and gesture in spatial thinking; two- and three-dimensional thinking; mental rotation; spatial scaling and proportional reasoning; and the role of games and play in developing spatial skills. An additional area of productive research combines these topics more broadly to investigate the relationships between spatial skills and mathematics in young learners (Verdine et  al. 2017; Cheng and Mix 2014). The findings of this robust field of intellectual endeavour emphasise that there are clear developmental stages at which children can, or cannot, complete specific spatial tasks or use spatial concepts (Burte et al. 2017; Geist 2016; Grotzer and Solis 2015, Hawes et al. 2015). Farran and Atkinson (2016) investigated how children aged four to seven represented spatial categories such as in, on, under, in front, behind, above, below, left, and right. They found significant differences in children’s understanding by age, with children progressing through three distinct levels of understanding. Five-­year-­olds had adult understandings of in and under; six-year-olds fully comprehended on, in front, below, and behind, while seven-year-olds still did not have

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography

137

an adult understanding of left and right. This developmental effect is relevant, especially in mental rotation tasks. Cheng and Mix (2014) provided six to eight-year-­ olds with practice activities in mental rotation then tested their mathematical abilities. Spatial training did enhance student performance, with more significant gains in older students. Another example of the role of development in spatial thinking is provided by Grotzer and Solis (2015). They examined how students in three grade levels (grade 2, grade 4, and grade 6) understand causes and effects separated both in physical and attentional space – a concept they term action at an attentional distance. This topic is of particular interest to geography educators who teach about global systems and issues where causes are physically distant from the effects. These concepts are vexing to young learners who struggle to integrate things they cannot see, or attend to, with something they can. Yet, geographic literacy requires learners to reason across spatial scales and environmental systems to understand causal relationships. Grotzer and Solis used a series of tasks, observations, and interviews. When explaining causes and effects across spatial scales, they found that younger learners tended toward local explanations for phenomena rather than distant ones. Further, the grade 2 students anthropomorphized phenomena more than the older students and used naïve and personal anecdotes in their explanations. In addition to these developmental effects, they found that learning the specific processes behind these tasks, for example, understanding the water cycle and a grasp of science concepts acquired across grade levels, aided in thinking across spatial scales. Importantly they saw that explicit training, asking students to be aware of attentional frames and consciously zooming in and out across scales of analysis, acted to mediate age differences in performance and understanding. A second finding is that spatial thinking is enhanced by spatial activities, playful learning, and the use of spatial language. Spatial games such as block building and assembling jigsaw puzzles are often accompanied by spatial language (Jirout and Newcombe 2015; Marcinowski and Campbell 2017), which, in turn, is often accompanied by co-speech gestures (Goldin-Meadow 2015; Sauter et al. 2012). Gestures play an important role in observing and explaining spatial relations (Goldin-Meadow 2014). Games provide important informal learning activities for young children, and spatial gameplay has been found to relate to the development of spatial skills (Ness and Farenga 2016; Resnick et al. 2016). A third related and significant finding is that with explicit activities, young learners can improve their spatial thinking skills. Cohrssen (2017) and colleagues developed a program for kindergarteners to explore understandings of two- and three-dimensional shapes and spatial thinking to enhance math skills. They intentionally embedded multiple opportunities for children to work with shapes and spatial thinking in a problem-based context that included mapping the route from home to school and comparing and discussing maps. They found that repeated use of spatial concepts and related language enhanced the young learners’ spatial orientation, visualisation, and ability to use mathematical language. Borriello and Liben (2017) studied the effects of making mothers of preschool children (ages four to six) aware of spatial thinking and strategies to encourage it.

138

S. W. Bednarz et al.

The mothers in the experimental group learned about spatial thinking, its importance in daily life and academic success, and how to play with their children to develop it. They then played with their child on jigsaw puzzles, LEGO pieces in a free play situation, and a LEGO construction activity. The control group mothers simply played with their children following the same three activities. The mothers in the experimental group were found to use more spatial language in all three activities. The children also used a higher percentage of spatial language, thus indicating that mothers could encourage and support their child’s spatial thinking. The authors of the study concluded: …this study provides a proof of concept that mother who are given brief, general instructions about spatial thinking are inspired to offer more spatial guidance to their children than they normally would…the findings offer encouragement for designing, implementing, and evaluating programs targeted to parents with the expectation that they, in turn, can foster their children’s spatial skills (Borriello and Liben 2017, p. 13).

This last finding is important because the research indicates several individual features that influence spatial ability, including environment, gender, physical development and socio-economic status (SES), play a role in developing spatial skills. Knowing that interventions are successful in closing the spatial thinking – SES and gender gap is significant. It clearly shows the way forward for primary education. In summary, the evidence suggests that in young children, spatial experiences improve the mastery of spatial language, understand key spatial concepts, and lay the foundation for future academic and professional success, particularly in highly spatialised fields such as engineering, science, and mathematics.

Implications for Primary Educators The implications of this research for primary educators are far-reaching and noticeable. There is a clear relationship between spatial ability, spatial skills, and spatial thinking and achievement in mathematics and the sciences such as geography. Thus, spatial education must be incorporated into pre-school and early school experiences. This should not be considered an add-on to an already packed curriculum but rather a necessary foundation for building intellectual capacity in young learners. The work of Uttal et al. (2013) clarifies that spatial thinking can—and should— be learned. Several of the studies reviewed above confirmed the positive effects of deliberate spatial education. Incorporating explicit spatial experiences in formal settings, like schools, and informal settings, such as playgroups and at home, will benefit all children. However, opportunities to develop spatial abilities are especially needed by those learners who, because of socio-economic status, gender, and physical development, maybe less spatially-abled, should be a priority. It is both an ethical and moral imperative to develop the spatial abilities of children to allow them equal access to STEM disciplines.

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography

139

Primary geography educators need to be aware of the relationship between spatial thinking and academic achievement. First, this is vital for developing curricula and instructional materials designed to prepare young learners with twenty-first century skills and perspectives. Second, the findings related to the value of explicit spatial language should guide primary geography educators in their classroom practices to be aware of and highlight key spatial concepts and terms. Third, primary geography educators may use this spatial thinking/STEM connection to enhance their position in schools. It may allow them to leverage their role in developing curricula, demanding more time for explicit geographic activities that enhance spatial skills such as moving in the environment, and taking the lead in shaping the nature of early childhood education.

Strategies to Enhance Spatial Thinking Newcombe (2016) suggested three ways to address the issue of spatial learning in formal educational settings. One strategy would be to enhance students’ spatial abilities beginning in infancy. A second strategy would be for educators, especially primary educators, to become effective spatial teachers. A third strategy, also suggested by Newcombe, is to spatialise the curriculum. To conclude, we explore strategies to enhance spatial thinking instruction. Enhancing what is taught and how it is taught is the challenge to improving the quantity and quality of spatial learning. Returning to the definition of spatial thinking as the use of spatial concepts, spatial representations, and processes of reasoning to conceptualise and solve problems (NRC 2006), it appears that one concrete strategy is for teachers to become aware of their use of spatial terms and concepts and to encourage young learners to develop their spatial language skills. This can occur in many contexts, including direct academic lessons and through play. Playing with blocks, exploring environments, real and imagined, and talking about these experiences are concrete strategies based on research that will spatialise pupils’ learning through an awareness of space. Talk is aided by gestures, which can show spatial relations visually (Goldin-­ Meadow 2014). Moving our hands as we explain something is natural, particularly when discussing spatial things, such as giving directions. Gestures both display what an individual knows and can assist in new learning; research using gestures in mathematics has produced positive achievement results. Younger pupils use gestures less frequently than older learners, so explicit instruction in gestures can help nurture thinking and problem-solving in the early years. As Goldin-Meadow explains, “Gesturing allows learners to take ideas that are not inherently spatial and lay them out in space, thus “spatialising” them. The learners can then make use of spatial mechanisms that they would not necessarily have used had they not gestured” (2014, p. 5). Primary geography educators should be encouraged to be aware of their gestures and to consider practical ways to display concepts using their hands. At the same time, they should encourage students to use gestures,

140

S. W. Bednarz et al.

particularly when explaining a problem or a process. This may help to clarify a students’ ideas about the issue. While primary geography educators are attuned to maps, diagrams, and other spatial representations, other primary teachers may not be. Geographers know that it is just as important to read and interpret a map (or diagram) as to read the text and that this is a skill (or set of skills) that is a challenge to teach. All primary educators should understand that learning to read visuals is as essential as reading text and that coordinating both will aid in students’ development of effective learning strategies. This is true for dynamic representations and animations as well as static graphs. Young learners should be encouraged to create visuals to communicate their understandings of spaces and places. Sketching draws learner attention to space, can encourage spatial language use, and may also be used as an assessment tool for educators to measure student understandings and perceptions. A study by Cole et al. (2015) showed positive results in spatial visualisation skills following an activity in which students, aged around 11 years, kept daily moon observation journals. Such findings may be valid for other detailed environmental experiences in which spatial drawing, language, and observation skills are developed. A rather obvious strategy to enhance spatial thinking is to actively engage young learners in the physical world in which they live. Developing observation skills (and spatial language), mapping and drawing the world they see, interacting physically and having experiences in the world all will assist in making students aware of space, spatial relations, and the geography of the places they know. Active learning is based on the idea that an effective teaching strategy moves a learner from doing to knowing, that is, along a continuum from action to abstraction (Newcombe 2016). Teachers can also model spatial habits of mind (Kim and Bednarz 2013) using think-aloud protocols and in their discussions of issues. Reinforcing students’ burgeoning spatial understandings by acting as a spatial ambassador may be an effective strategy that needs to be examined through research. Primary geography educators can take a role in helping their peers to develop spatial habits of mind to infuse such strategies across a school. Geist (2016) lists several activities to support spatial thinking abilities, including having children use maps in daily life; encouraging children to identify and use landmarks to describe where things are located using spatial language such as near, before, and after; and giving children frequent opportunities to visualise and present their spatial understandings through drawings, sketches, and maps. Educators interested in developing spatial thinking skills may wish to consider how children progress in their learning. Research in learning progressions confirms the utility of analysing concepts and setting staged benchmarks to develop a thorough understanding, skill, or conceptualisation. The framework for spatial skills presented by Uttal et al. (2013) may serve as a mechanism for students to consider space and spatial relations. Asking young learners to attend to intrinsic static relations first, then expanding to intrinsic-dynamic and extrinsic relations, may be a logical process to hone spatial thinking, an idea that should be researched. Another way that primary geography teachers can facilitate students’ practice of spatial

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography

141

thinking is to use questions that can stimulate their spatial thinking. A taxonomy of spatial thinking (Jo and Bednarz 2009) can be helpful for this purpose. An educational taxonomy is defined as “a classification of educational outcome” (Bloom et al. 1956, p. 1) and conceptualised as “a framework for classifying statements of what we expect or intend students to learn as a result of instruction” (Krathwohl 2002, p. 212). Several taxonomies have been developed for educational purposes and used to evaluate instructional activities and materials regarding where the relative emphases are, how the curriculum is aligned, and what educational opportunities are missing (Anderson and Krathwohl 2001; Bloom et al. 1956). A taxonomy of spatial thinking was constructed to help teachers specifically address the key three aspects of spatial thinking, “concepts of space, tools of representation, and processes of reasoning” (NRC 2006, p. 12) in their teaching practices. It is a theory-based framework that classifies concepts and cognitive processes that constitute spatial thinking skills. The significance of using and creating representations in spatial thinking is also manifested in the taxonomy. As shown in Fig. 1, the taxonomy has a three-dimensional structure (a 4×3×2 cube with 24 cells), in which the three components of spatial thinking constitute the three primary axes. The three primary categories are represented by three different colour schemes, and the subcategories of each primary category are represented by varying degrees of saturation along with each colour scheme according to the complexity and abstractness. Each of the 24 cells of the taxonomy is unique in that it represents a unique combination of the subcategories of the three components of spatial thinking. For example, Cell 1 represents a form of thinking related to

Fig. 1  Taxonomy of spatial thinking

142

S. W. Bednarz et al.

non-­spatial concepts, irrelevant to using a representation, and requiring the lowest level of the cognitive process. Cell 24, on the other hand, represents a kind of thinking that requires an understanding of complex-spatial concepts, using or creating a spatial representation, and the highest level of the cognitive process. Using this taxonomy, teachers can evaluate, select, and ultimately design spatial questions effectively as it allows a detailed analysis of questions in terms of the three components of spatial thinking (Jo et al. 2010). For instance, a question asking about a nonspatial concept, for example, gross domestic production or religion, is irrelevant to using or creating a representation like a map and requires the lowest level of cognitive process (e.g., define, match, recall) would fall in Cell 1. A question, on the other hand, that requires an understanding of a complex-spatial concept (e.g., distribution, pattern, scale), uses or asks learners to create a spatial representation, and requires the highest level of cognitive processes (e.g., generalise, hypothesise) would be in Cell 24. In general, questions categorised into the upper-­right corner of the taxonomy are likely to be more spatial than those categorised into the bottom-left corner of the taxonomy. Using the taxonomy for a systematic question analysis, teachers can critically evaluate instructional materials, textbook questions and other questions from a spatial perspective. In addition, the taxonomy allows teachers to distinguish between questions and activities in which all three components of spatial thinking are integrated and those in which only one or two components are involved. The grey cells of the taxonomy represent incomplete spatial thinking since they involve only one or two components of this powerful way of thinking. The coloured cells, on the other hand, represent spatial thinking questions that engage all three components. Although questions and class activities represented by these grey cells are unavoidable and necessary, depending on the learning stage, they are not sufficient. Questions should be selected to ensure students also experience questions and activities which require them to integrate all components of spatial thinking. Thus, the taxonomy of spatial thinking provides teachers with a tool to effectively implement spatial thinking into instructional practices. The taxonomy offers a sound framework to evaluate the spatiality of questions. The uses of the taxonomy can also be extended to systematically assess how other educational materials, such as lesson plans, curricula, and assessments, incorporate aspects of spatial thinking. In summary, primary geography educators can do a range of things to spatialise the curriculum and build their pupils’ capacity to think spatially. The research is detailed – spatial ability is malleable and is a predictor of success in a range of disciplines and professions. All children must have the opportunity to become highly proficient spatial thinkers, a goal accomplished beginning at very young ages through explicit instruction and experiences.

Spatial Thinking in Primary Geography

143

References Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York Bloom BS, Engelhart MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. David McKay Company, Inc., New York Borriello GA, Liben LS (2017) Encouraging maternal guidance of preschoolers spatial thinking during block play. Child Dev. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12779 Burte H, Gardony AL, Hutton A, Taylor HA (2017) Think3d!: improving mathematics learning through embodied spatial training. Cognit Res 2(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s41235-­017-­0052-­9 Cheng YL, Mix KS (2014) Spatial training improves children’s mathematics ability. J Cognit Dev 15(1):2–11 Cohrssen C, Quadros-Wander B, Page J, Klarin S (2017) Between the big trees: a project based approach to investigating shape and spatial thinking in a kindergarten program. Australas J Early Child 42(1):94–104 Cole M, Wilhelm J, Yang H (2015) Student-moon observations and spatial-scientific reasoning. Int J Sci Educ 37(11):1815–1833 Farran EK, Atkinson L (2016) The development of spatial category representations from 4 to 7 years. Br J Dev Psychol 34:555–568 Geist E (2016) Let’s make a map: the developmental stages of children’s mapmaking. YC 71(2):50 Goldin-Meadow S (2014) How gesture works to change our minds. Trend Neurosci Educ. https:// doi.org/10.1016/jtine.2014.01.002 Goldin-Meadow S (2015) Gesture and cognitive development. In: Liben LS, Müller U (eds) Cognitive processes. Volume 2 of the Handbook of child psychology and developmental science, 7th edn). Editor-in-Chief: R. M. Lerner. Wiley, Hoboken Grotzer TA, Solis SL (2015) Action at an attentional distance: a study of children’s reasoning about causes and effects involving spatial and attentional discontinuity. J Res Sci Teach 52(7):1003–1030 Hawes Z, LeFevre J-A, Xu C, Bruce CD (2015) Mental rotation with tangible three-dimensional objects: a new measure sensitive to developmental differences in 4- to 8-year-old children. Mind Brain Educ 9:10–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12051 Jirout JJ, Newcombe NS (2015) Building blocks for developing spatial skills: evidence from a large, representative US sample. Psychol Sci 26(3):302–310 Jo I, Bednarz SW (2009) Evaluating geography textbook questions from a spatial perspective: using concepts of space, tools of representation, and cognitive processes to evaluate spatiality. J Geogr 108(1):4–13 Jo I, Bednarz SW, Metoyer S (2010) Selecting and designing questions to facilitate spatial thinking. Geogr Teach 7(2):49–55 Kim M, Bednarz R (2013) Effects of a GIS course on self-assessment of Spatial Habits of Mind (SHOM). J Geogr 112(4):165–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2012.684356 Kozhevnikov M, Kosslyn S, Shephard J (2005) Spatial versus object visualizers: a new characterization of visual cognitive style. Mem Cognit 33(4):710–726. https://doi.org/10.3758/ BF03195337 Krathwohl DR (2002) A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Pract 41(4):212–218 Liben LS (2006) Education for spatial thinking. In: Renninger KA, Sigel IE (eds) Handbook of child psychology, vol 4, 6th edn. Wiley, Hoboken, pp  197–247. https://doi. org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0406 Linn MC, Petersen AC (1985) Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta-analysis. Child Dev 56:1479–1498 Marcinowski EC, Campbell JM (2017) Building on what you have learned: object construction skill during infancy predicts the comprehension of spatial relations words. Int J Behav Dev 41(3):341–349

144

S. W. Bednarz et al.

National Research Council Committee on Spatial Thinking (2006) Learning to think spatially. National Academies Press, Washington, DC Ness D, Farenga SJ (2016) Blocks, bricks, and planks: relationships between affordance and visuo-spatial constructive play objects. Am J Play 8(2):201 Newcombe N (2016) Thinking spatially in the science classroom. Curr Opin Behav Sci 10:1–6 Resnick I, Verdine BN, Golinkoff R, Hirsh-Pasek K (2016) Geometric toys in the attic? Early Child Res Q 36:358–365 Sauter M, Uttal DH, Schaal A, Levine SC, Goldin-Meadow S (2012) Learning what children know about space from looking at their hands: the added value of gesture in spatial communication. J Exp Child Psychol 111(4):587–606 Sinton DS (2011) Spatial thinking. In: Stoltman J (ed) 21st century geography: a reference handbook. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 733–744 Uttal DH (2000) Seeing the big picture: map use and the development of spatial cognition. Geospatial technology competency model. Dev Sci 3(3):247–264 Uttal DH, Cohen CA (2012) 4 spatial thinking and STEM education: when, why, and how? In: Psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory, 57, 147. Academic, New York Uttal DH, Meadow NG, Tipton E, Hand LL, Alden AR, Warren C, Newcombe N (2013) The malleability of spatial skills; a meta-analysis of training studies. Psychol Bull 139(2):352–402 Verdine BN, Golinkoff RM, Hirsh-Pasek K, Newcombe NS (2017) Spatial skills, their development, and their links to mathematics. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. https://doi.org/10.1111/ mono.12280. Wai J, Lubinski D, Benbow CP (2009) Spatial ability for STEM domains: aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. J Educ Psychol 101(4):817–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence Daniela Schmeinck

Abstract  Access to digital technologies and the Internet is having a decisive impact on all levels of a child’s life: personal, family, social, and in the future, professional. In the educational context of primary schools, both analogue and digital media play a decisive role through various media-didactic (media-educational) functions. On the one hand, digital media and artifacts are used extensively in primary geography lessons. Thus, mainly due to its specific approach, Geography teaching can contribute to reconstructing the complex, digitally shaped reality of life in an interdisciplinary didactic way (learning about media). On the other hand, digital media can support learning and cognitive processes in geography lessons in such a way that includes the development of the understanding of geography as a science process (scientific literacy, e.g., in the form of data acquisition and communication). In this respect, digital media can be seen as “media-didactic added value” (learning with and through media). In addition, digital media are used in geography lessons in several ways. For example, to allow access to things, as a source of information, as a research tool, as a means of documentation, and as a means of communication. This chapter describes the potential of digital technologies and digital media for the further development and innovation of education. It presents ways in which primary geography can and should contribute to facilitating children’s digital competence. Keywords  Digital competence · Media literacy · Digital technologies · Primary geography · Primary school

D. Schmeinck (*) Institute of Primary Science and Social Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_10

145

146

D. Schmeinck

Introduction In the last 30 years, geography has changed a lot. This change is due to the increasing importance of geoinformatisation and thus the implementation of geoinformatics (GI) and geoinformatic technologies (GIT) into all areas of Geography (Voženílek 2009). Considering its increasing importance, in 1990 Goodchild and Kemp requested the fundamental inclusion of GIS in school education. They argued that GIS is an essential tool for analysing the environment and solving problems. In addition, according to Goodchild and Kemp, the implementation of GIS in the classroom promotes student interest in geography and geography-related subjects. It motivates learners to pursue careers in science and technology. The benchmark statement of HERODOT (Network for Geography in Higher Education) clearly emphasises the importance of GIS for school education. According to this statement, geography education should enable learners to participate in public decision-­ making processes actively, understand the primary purpose of GIS to real-world problems, and use GI interfaces to investigate, reflect and communicate spatial phenomena (HERODOT 2008). In the initial phase, the demand to implement GIS in the classroom was mainly related to the field of secondary education or university education, and the goals associated with the use of GIS in the classroom were strongly subject-oriented. Teaching with GIS means using GIS products (software, digital data, web maps, satellite images etc.) in instruction to help students learn key geographic concepts and relationships. Teaching about GIS means providing students with the skills and understandings required to operate software, manipulate a GPS receiver, design spatial databases, and produce digital maps (Voženílek 2009, p. 89).

However, the educational objectives and the existing digital technologies, opportunities, and challenges have changed significantly over the past 30 years. Today, digital and networked technologies, mobile technologies devices (smartphones and tablets), wearable devices (smartwatches, fitness bracelets and digital glasses), networked cars, kitchen and household appliances, intelligent home automation, and so on are increasingly shaping our lives. But it is not just the technologies that have changed rapidly in recent years. Areas such as communication, working, leisure time activities, banking, dating, shopping, travel planning, information research have all changed. Thus, in the last few decades, almost all areas of our lives have been heavily influenced by increasing digitisation  – the new possibilities have changed lives. All these changes came along with numerous consequences. Our behaviour patterns, shopping behaviours, interests, movement profiles, health data, and personal data are logged, tracked, stored, and analysed in digital data (big data) (Schmeinck 2019). In many cases, this data also contains geographical information like movement profiles and location data, used for location-based services, navigation, customer orientation and marketing capabilities etc. The almost complete digital penetration and automation of our lives do not exclude the everyday life of primary school children. The results of the German studies “Kinder + Medien, Computer + Internet.” (Children + Media, Computer + Internet or KIM-Study 2014)

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

147

and “Kindheit, Internet, Medien” (Childhood, Internet, Media or KIM-Study, 2016) note that digital media is almost ubiquitous in everyday life of many primary school children (Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (MPFS) 2015, 2017). Eickemann et al. (2015) point out that today’s children tend to grow up with digital media and, in general, autonomously learn to use digital devices. But still, in comparison to other societal transformation processes, mediatisation or even profound mediatisation, (Hepp 2018) takes a unique position in this, as it permeates all areas of life and covers all social groups. Furthermore, the processes hold a powerful dynamic and affect all development phases of an individual. Thus, e.g. as a result of these developments, today’s children grow experiences media as an integral part of life. Wagner (2016) compares this with adults today and their comparable phase of life. However, this does not mean that children are automatically equipped with the necessary skills to effectively, conscientiously and reflectively use digital technologies (Schmeinck 2013a, b). As a result, there is a broad international consensus that digital competence is an essential base for access to knowledge and information in today’s digitalised knowledge society, and therefore should be taught in primary schools (Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (MPFS) 2015; Ilomäki et al. 2016). Therefore, the following sections first address the question of which goals are currently to be achieved in connection with the promotion of digital competence in elementary school. Then, based on the identified most important areas of digital competence to be promoted, the article describes how elementary school geography and a geographic perspective can promote learners’ digital competence while also contributing to geographic education.

Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence in Primary Schools In recent years – not only due to the COVID-19 crisis – digitisation has infiltrated education, which has led to immense financial investment in schools around the world. In many cases, however, it has been ignored that effective and sustainable digitisation in schools includes the technical infrastructure. Digitisation must also be taken up as a topic in the classroom and as a learning instrument. In 2006, the European Parliament and the Council (2006) published a recommendation identifying eight Key Competencies for Lifelong Learning. Digital Competence was recognised as one of the fundamental skills and defined as follows: Digital Competence involves the confident and critical use of Information Society Technology (IST) for work, leisure and communication. It is underpinned by basic skills in ICT: the use of computers to retrieve, assess, store, produce, present and exchange information, and to communicate and participate in collaborative networks via the Internet (European Parliament and the Council 2006).

Four years later, the principles of this recommendation were again recognised in the Europe 2020 Strategy (European Commission 2010a) and the Digital Agenda for

148

D. Schmeinck

Europe (European Commission 2010b). Ferrari (2012) thereby defined digital competence as The set of knowledge, skills, attitudes (thus including abilities, strategies, values and awareness) that are required when using ICT and digital media to perform tasks; solve problems; communicate; manage information; collaborate; create and share content; and build knowledge effectively, efficiently, appropriately, critically, creatively, autonomously, flexibly, ethically, reflectively for work, leisure, participation, learning, socialising, consuming, and empowerment (pp. 3–4).

Until the mid-1970s, the school world was analogous: blackboard, chalk, schoolbooks and in rare cases, video films or audio recordings dominated the classrooms. Then, the first pocket calculators and the first computers were integrated into the classrooms. The computers were expensive and unique, the practical applications for the classrooms were still in short supply. The first computers in schools were mainly used in individual small groups or special working groups and mainly for coding. During the 1990s, when hardware finally became a bit cheaper, computer rooms were set up in more and more schools. Nevertheless, the use of computers in and for teaching and learning was limited and based very much on personal initiatives and teachers’ motivations. However, from the mid-1990s, an intense debate began among experts and the public about digital media’s added value and importance for teaching. The movement of computer use in schools intensified. Döbeli Honegger (2016) states that all children need to be prepared for their professional and social future with didactically reasonable and efficient means and using examples from their lifeworld. Teaching without digital media doesn’t seem appropriate anymore. Accordingly, he describes four arguments for the use of digital media in schools: 1 . Learning – The use of digital media can promote learning. 2. Every day and the world we live in – Digitalization belongs to the school because it shapes the everyday life and reality of the learner. 3. Future – Today, digital skills are a necessary cultural technique. 4. Efficiency  – By using digital media, specific processes in the schools can be made more efficient. (pp. 63–74) Based on Döbeli Honegger’s arguments, but with explicit reference to primary school, Irion (2018) stated that media education is already an element of primary school education and, thus, a primary school topic. It should not be left to chance whether and how primary school children are supported in dealing with the various potentials and dangers. By missing the appropriate mediation of the media competencies required for critical self-determined media use, severe and new social injustices are developing already at primary school age (see also Irion and Sahin 2018). Irion notes that long-term digital media can offer enormous potential for teaching and learning efficiency. At the same time, he stressed that during the introduction, however, significant additional loads and burdens for primary and secondary schools are to be expected (Irion 2018, p. 7). Nevertheless, against the background of the already existing high level of digital media in society and childhood, the “every day

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

149

and the world we live in argument” and the “future argument” clearly show the demand of primary schools to deal with the digital world in the educational context. Despite the demanded implementation of digital media into education and the described need for facilitating learners’ digital competence, the debate about digitalisation in schools continues today. While some experts are passionate and enthusiastic about implementing digital technologies into teaching and their effectiveness and added value, others are still critical against their implementation or use in the classroom. Therefore, Makki et al. (2018) conclude that digital media and ICT offer opportunities for advancing and improving education, but it needs to be appropriately integrated into teaching practice. Nevertheless, digital media should always be checked to see to what extent it serves as good teaching for optimal learning.

Areas of Application of Digital Media in the Classroom Against the background of the discussion described above, Döbeli Honegger (2016) identified three different areas for the use of digital media in the classroom: 1 . Teaching WITH/THROUGH digital media. 2. Teaching ABOUT digital media. 3. Teaching DESPITE digital media. (p. 76) Within teaching WITH/TROUGH media, the digital is understood as an aid or a tool, and thus, the focus of teaching remains on the content to be learned; learning ABOUT media means that the digital medium itself acts as the subject of the learning and thus becomes the focus of the teaching. In terms of education DESPITE the media, Döbeli Honegger stresses the danger for learners in being distracted by digital media in the classroom. However, he does not refuse the use of digital media in the classroom but instead demands that the students learn not to be distracted by digital temptations (ibid.). The added value of digitisation in the educational context is therefore just achieving old goals faster, easier, better etc. The even more critical added value is that, in addition to dealing with the content, there is a conscious or unconscious examination of the processes of digital reality. Thus, the added value lies in facilitating learners’ digital competence and thus in significantly expanding the target dimensions of the teaching.

Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence In 2012, the German Kultusministerkonferenz (Conference of Ministers of Education (KMK)) published a declaration known as “Medienbildung in der Schule” (media education in schools). The declaration aimed to implement basic and continuous media education as a critical aspect of school education and offer

150

D. Schmeinck

schools and teachers professional learning opportunities for media education. Four years later, the KMK presented the strategy paper “Bildung in der digitalen Welt” (Education in a Digital World) and thus, postulated an action plan for shaping one of the most significant social challenges. Thereby, the fundamental goal of the KMK strategy was to provide all students entering the primary school from the year 2018/2019 onwards with the required digital competencies until the end of their compulsory education (KMK 2016, p.  18). Thus, even elementary schools are required to facilitate learners’ digital competence. Starting with primary education, federal states include the competencies required for active, self-determined participation in a digital world into their curriculums. This will not be done by a separate curriculum for one’s own and new subject but will become an integral part of the subject curricula of all subjects. Each subject contains specific approaches to the competencies in the digital world. Thus, subject-specific competencies are in the same way acquired, then essential (subject-) specific characteristics of the competencies for the digital world. In this way, the development of competencies (analogous to reading and writing) in various learning opportunities and experiences (original in German; KMK 2016, pp. 11–12).

The following six areas promote learners’ digital competence: 1 . Research, process and store 2. Communicate and cooperate 3. Produce and present 4. Protect and act safely 5. Problem-solving and acting 6. Analyse and reflect On the European level, the European Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (DigComp) (Ferrari 2013) published by the European Commission in 2013, as well as the DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016), the updated 2016 version of the framework, provide a framework of what it means to be digitally savvy in an increasingly globalised and digital world. The five central areas of digital competence described in the framework are: 1 . Information and data literacy 2. Communication and collaboration 3. Digital content creation 4. Safety 5. Problem solving (DigComp (Ferrari 2013), DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016)) The competence areas described by the KMK and the European Commission involve much more than basic computer-based knowledge or pure knowledge of appropriate technologies. Nevertheless, both documents’ division of areas and competencies is artificial. There are numerous overlaps and cross-references between the areas and competencies. Because both the subject-specific problem-solving strategies and the working processes are very different across disciplines, integrating all subjects in promoting competence seems indispensable. The question, therefore, arises on how primary Geography – the geographical perspective in primary school, can contribute to facilitating learners’ digital competence.

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

151

 acilitating Learners’ Digital Competence – The Role F of Primary Geography Based on the five most important areas of digital competence described by the European Commission, the following paragraphs follow up on the question of how the primary school geography and a geographical perspective can help to promote the digital expertise of learners and, at the same time, can also contribute to geographical education.

Information and Data literacy The Internet offers multiple perspectives, spatially related, and up-to-date or even real-time information. In 2014, 48% of the German children between six and seven years of age, 60% of children between eight to nine years of age, and 75% of children between ten to eleven years of age were researching school topics after hours at home (MPFS 2015). Also, for geographical aspects in primary school, search engines are gaining importance in addition to children’s books. Children can locate information on the Internet relating to cultural, geopolitical or historical events, technical inventions, current news, various topics, persons, or places. However, when using search engines on the Internet, younger children often experience difficulties because they are not yet familiar with the use of phrases or keywords for the search. Therefore, they often enter any number of search terms or whole sentences or questions in the search box. In addition, misspelt words or everyday language often leads to the lack of desired search results (Bilal 2000, 2002). Furthermore, the ability to filter search results for relevance and to assess their credibility must first be learned and understood (Druin et al. 2009). Additionally, the quality and the correctness of the information is not always recognisable for the learner. Hence, primary school children should be supervised and supported when undertaking Internet research. There are numerous child-friendly websites on the Internet, where children can purposefully research information on subject-related topics and thus learn how to structure and evaluate search results. They can also recognise and critically evaluate data, sources, and underlying strategies and intentions. This, in turn, is a crucial prerequisite for children to recognise inappropriate media content and deal with it appropriately and be able to identify and use suitable aid and support structures if necessary (Medienberatung NRW 2018). To deal with the challenges of digital information, primary school children must learn to deal with digital information in a self-determined, responsible and goal-­ oriented way. In the context of geography teaching and learning, children can learn to browse, search, and filter data, information, and digital content. Nevertheless, in comparison to other subjects, geographical questions and topics are not usually based on just one “correct” or “unique” answer. A multi-perspective consideration

152

D. Schmeinck

is required in human geography (e.g., use of space, sustainability, climate change, migration, and globalisation). Thus, when researching geographic content, children need to be able to identify and distinguish different perspectives, opinions, and even authors interests. There are a variety of geographical topics and questions that children can research on the Internet or by using digital media. For example, the children can examine different areas or life situations. They can undertake research on various natural phenomena, natural cycles and analyse, structure, and document their research results accordingly. By dealing with digital cartographic media (e.g., Google Maps), the children can improve their spatial perception and their ability to orient themselves in local, regional, or even global areas. With the help of digital media, they can investigate how people use, design, pollute, endanger, and protect spaces and thus gain insight into the diversity, development, and interdependence of spaces. Above all, however, they can also gain insight into how people can participate and influence the design of the natural and social environment in the sense of a sustainable approach. By researching and answering these geographical questions, the children not only gain geographical knowledge. They also get empowered “to articulate information needs, to search for data, information and content in digital environments, to access them and to navigate between them” ((DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016, p. 8)). They learn to “create and update personal search strategies. (…) To analyse, compare and critically evaluate the credibility and reliability of sources of data, information and digital content. To analyse, interpret and critically evaluate the data, information and digital content. (…) To organise, store and retrieve data, information and content in digital environments. To organise and process them in a structured environment.” (ebd.). Therefore, geography teaching can facilitate learners’ digital competence concerning information and data literacy.

Communication and Collaboration Collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and creativity are self-directed and future-oriented learning competencies. These competencies are known as the 4C model of learning, originating in the US initiative “Partnership for twenty-first century Learning” (P21). Experts from business, education and politics identified the four key competencies (4C) that form the basis for self-directed learning and prepare learners for a changing working environment. Nowadays, the model is being discussed controversially in education orientated debates. While all critics complain about the strong orientation towards the economy’s needs, the proponents emphasise the model’s potential as an interdisciplinary orientation framework for the methodology and didactics of the various specialist disciplines. According to the representatives and proponents of the 4C model, the targeted promotion of competencies should give the learners a well-founded educational basis and thus prepare them for the future challenges of an increasingly automated (working) world. It is

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

153

questionable whether a corresponding future-oriented education can be limited to promoting four areas of competence. But maybe that’s not what the authors of the 4C model intended. In principle, however, enabling the four competencies shown in the model seems meaningful and important. Also, in primary school science and social sciences and primary geography, the promotion of these interdisciplinary competencies and thus, the promotion of communication and collaboration is seen as meaningful and important. Communicating and cooperating are seen as a basis for acquiring new knowledge and new concepts and therefore count as one of the central tasks of teaching and learning. “Through communication processes, old concepts can be questioned, and alternative thought models become clear. Cooperation with other students also enables learning processes that go beyond the possibilities of a single person” (GDSU 2013, original in the German language). The ability to communicate appropriately and to work constructively with others also represents, from a teaching perspective, “a central basis for co-determination based on solidarity and for help shaping the world” (ibid.). Above all, the importance of digital communication and collaboration has been highlighted by the challenges connected with the various COVID-19 related measures such as distance learning and homeschooling. COVID-19 quickly turned most of the working world upside down. Today, people work in the home office, communicate online, and cooperate in digital workspaces. We work digitally, communicate digitally and often use digital media to keep in touch with other people in our private lives. Unfortunately, within the educational area and especially at the primary school level, the COVID-19 switch to homeschooling and distance learning did not always occur as smoothly as in business. Even though there are programs and methods in which virtual learning groups can be set up, the children can work on something together. The lack of computers and tablets, schools and homes without appropriate access to the Internet and even teachers who did not know how to design digital learning tasks for children at home quickly made the shortcomings and problems in the education system visible. Nevertheless, even for primary school children, there are limitless possibilities in terms of communication and collaboration in our digitised world. People can exchange ideas with anyone in real-time from anywhere in the world. However, in class, the children should learn how to work with digital media, talk to each other about it, and question what they experience. Teaching and learning primary geography using digital media offers many new possibilities for communication and cooperation. For example, email, messaging services, SMS, video conferencing, and chats allow primary school children to collaborate beyond the confines of the classroom. This option offers excellent added value, especially for geographical, cultural and sociological aspects. Regional or international exchange and cooperation can increase knowledge and change perceptions and perspectives. In Geography education, there are also many new ways of sharing and documenting ideas, experiences, data, or knowledge for scientific or technical topics (e.g., collecting weather data, comparing test or research results, and creating presentations together) or documents as well as creating class wikis podcasts or blogs (Schmeinck 2018a). In addition to the added educational value,

154

D. Schmeinck

however, it seems indispensable for the children to also deal critically with the effects of the various new opportunities for communication and cooperation. Thus, by using the described new possibilities for communication and cooperation, primary school children also need to become familiar with safe communication rules based on ethical principles and cultural-social norms or develop and observe them together. They should recognise personal, social, and economic risks and effects of cyber violence and crime and know and use contact persons and possible reaction options. By answering geographical questions, the children can get empowered to “interact through a variety of digital technologies and to understand appropriate digital communication means for a given context” (DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016, p. 8)). They learn to: share data, information and digital content with others through appropriate digital technologies. To act as an intermediary, to know about referencing and attribution practices. (…) To participate in society through the use of public and private digital services. To seek opportunities for self-empowerment and for participatory citizenship through appropriate digital technologies. (…) To use digital tools and technologies for collaborative processes, and for co-construction and co-creation of resources and knowledge. (…) To be aware of behavioral norms and know-how while using digital technologies and interacting in digital environments. To adapt communication strategies to the specific audience and to be aware of cultural and generational diversity in digital environments. (…) To create and manage one or multiple digital identities, to be able to protect one’s own reputation, to deal with the data that one produces through several digital tools, environments and services” (ebd.).

Thus, Geography teaching can contribute to facilitating learners’ digital competence concerning the area of communication and collaboration. However, this takes a lot of time. Neither the communication and collaboration competencies nor awareness of the importance of communication and collaboration can be conveyed simply within a few Geography lessons. Open forms of learning and teaching, questions and tasks, interest-oriented topics, time and scope for cooperative learning, and joint discussions promote the development of the competencies. Therefore, communication and cooperation should be fundamental teaching goals as early as primary school and should be promoted accordingly. Ultimately, however, communication and cooperation in geography lessons will only succeed if the teachers are also aware of these competencies’ importance in the education context. Only with an appropriate awareness can teachers strengthen the learners’ understanding of the importance of communication and cooperation for learning.

Digital Content Creation Maps have always played a crucial role in geography education. Due to the availability of digital media, interactive digital maps are now used in geography teaching. Even outside of the classroom, they are omnipresent in our society and thus in the everyday life of learners (Hemmer and Wrenger 2016; Hennig and Vogler 2011).

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

155

In their study on digital and analog maps, Vetter et al. (2012) conclude that digital maps are widespread and are used frequently among learners. The application areas include real-time information on aeroplanes, buses and trains, the tracking of parcel and delivery services, and location-based services (LBS) such as Find My, Google Latitude, Facebook Places, Foursquare. Thus, due to the broad availability of mobile devices such as smartphones or tablets, digital maps have become an essential application for interacting with a digitally enriched space (Traun et al. 2013). Studies on the use of real-time geographies in the classroom show that the application and use of digital geodata in class (geocaching or collaborative mapping exercises) and thus the combination of informal and formal learning has a positive impact on both motivation and the quality of teaching and learning (Hartl et al. 2006; Schleicher 2006; Koller 2010). Thus, implementing “real-time geographies” into teaching and learning processes also enables learners to recognise themselves as media producers (Schmeinck 2013c). But not only (digital) maps play a decisive role in geography lessons. The use of analogue media for the documentation of lesson results, producing text, pictures, models and posters, and presenting or displaying something has a long tradition in teaching primary geography. So, even apart from digital (interactive) maps, digital media in Geography education offers many possibilities, such as explanatory videos, multimedia presentations, comics, charts, infographics and animations. Using the camera and microphone, which are usually integrated into the devices, children can easily and quickly record, capture, edit and share recorded contributions (e.g., expert interviews), digital photos and videos of landscape, plants, animals, engineering or natural processes with others. Lengthy processes such as the growth and aging of plants or the formation of clouds and high-speed processes like an avalanche or a mud flood can be made visible by time-lapse or slow-motion videos. The audiovisual formats and the possibilities for graphical visualisation of data represents an added value of digital media for teaching primary sciences and social sciences. Thus, due to the wide range of different means of analogue and digital media and the possibilities that arise by the combination of new and traditional media, geography, in particular, offers excellent potential to facilitate learners’ digital competence. By answering geographical questions, the children are empowered to “create and edit digital content in different formats, to express oneself through digital means” (DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016, p. 9)). They learn to: modify, refine, improve and integrate information and content into an existing body of knowledge to create new, original and relevant content and knowledge. (…) To understand how copyright and licenses apply to data, information and digital content. (…) To plan and develop a sequence of understandable instructions for a computing system to solve a given problem or perform a specific task” (ebd.).

Thus, Geography teaching can facilitate learners’ digital competence concerning digital content creation. Because geography is viewed as a media-intensive and media-oriented subject, teaching and learning primary geography offers the combination of teaching geographical and media skills (Kestler 2015).

156

D. Schmeinck

Safety The discussion and handling of digital geomedia, or geodata, in geography teaching and learning offers numerous possibilities for digital content creation. At the same time, it also provides starting points for students to critically reflect on current geodata disclosure questions or data collection consequences. Thus, by implementing digital geomedia or geodata in geography teaching and learning, children can also learn about the dangers of dealing with geomedia and geodata (Schmeinck 2016a, b). There are numerous opportunities in geography teaching to promote good, meaningful and safe handling and use of digital media. Children can use digital media to document experiments, present work results and learning processes, create comics, explanatory videos, documentaries, stop motion films, or even design posters and presentations. The children learn to select and use digital media in target-­ orientated, reflective and creative contexts. Additionally, by dealing with the various media, they learn about other file formats and ways to organise and securely store digital data, act responsibly towards personal and foreign data, and pay attention to data protection, privacy, and information security. Consequently, implementing digital geomedia or geodata into teaching and learning enables learners to recognise themselves as media producers. It also helps students develop a critical, reflective and sensible approach to geodata and geoinformation (Schmeinck 2013c). By answering geographical questions, the children can also get empowered to “protect devices and digital content, and to understand risks and threats in digital environments. To know about safety and security measures and to have due regard to reliability and privacy” (DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et  al. 2016, p.  9)). They learn to “protect personal data and privacy in digital environments. To understand how to use and share personally identifiable information while protecting oneself and others from damages. To understand that digital services use a: Privacy policy” to inform how personal data is used. (…) To be able to avoid health risks and threats to physical and psychological well-being while using digital technologies. To be able to protect oneself and others from possible dangers in digital environments (e.g. cyberbullying). To be aware of digital technologies for social well-being and social inclusion. (…) To be aware of the environmental impact of digital technologies and their use” (ebd.).

Thus, Geography teaching can facilitate learners’ digital competence concerning safety.

Problem-Solving Problem orientation and problem-solving in teaching and learning describes a concept based on learning psychology and didactics. It aims to encourage learners to learn in an organised and structured manner using specialist content. The idea of problem orientation assumes that learning is generally an active-constructive, self-­ directed, situational, and social process and thus follows a moderately constructivist

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

157

view of learning. This is where digital media and geography lessons can make a decisive contribution. On the one hand, geography lessons without problem-solving appear poor in content and worthless since the lessons remain without individual, scientific or social relevance. Problem-solving and geography lessons are therefore inseparable from each other. Hence, dealing with geographical questions always means dealing with problems. To understand our increasingly digital and automated world, it is no longer enough to use digital devices such as notebooks, tablets or smartphones or to handle various software applications (Schmeinck 2018b). The Society for Computer Science demanded that public education schools should “open to all pupils [...] equal access to computer science [...] and working methods, requires informatics education to prepare them for lifelong learning [...]” (Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI) 2000, p. 1). In this regard, the KMK stated in the Education in the Digital World strategy paper that all students should know and understand the functioning and basic principles of the digital world. They should recognise and formulate algorithmic structures in digital tools and plan and provide a structured, algorithmic sequence to solve a problem (KMK 2016). The Media Competence Framework of North Rhine-Westphalia describes, in connection with the competence area “Problem-Solving and Modeling”, states that learners should be able to identify, know, understand and consciously use fundamental principles and functions of the digital world. They should recognise, understand, and reflect algorithmic patterns and structures in different contexts, describe problems formally, develop problem-solving strategies, and plan a structured, algorithmic sequence. They should be able to implement these solutions by coding. Last but not least, they should be able to reflect and analyse the solution strategies found and describe potential influences of algorithms and the impact of automation on processes in the digital world (Medienberatung NRW 2018). Primary school-aged children should acquire basic computer science skills. They should be empowered to identify problems in their everyday lives, model them abstractly, break them down into sub-problems or steps, and design and elaborate suitable solution strategies. They should be able to represent these formally so that they can be understood and executed by a human or even a computer (International Association for the Evaluation of Education Achievement (IEA) n.d.). Last but not least, they should also reflect the effects of algorithms on digitised society and the effects of automation on one’s reality. In geography class, learners can use digital maps and applications to create sketch maps and, by the use of digital media, collect, examine, process, analyse, and prepare data on various topics (e.g., urban development, sustainability, spaces, culture, mobility, etc.). They learn to plan work processes using digital media and to use digital media effectively when solving geographical questions (e.g. measuring UV index, temperature, precipitation, wind strength, noise level, compass, taking pictures, recording videos). Thus, by answering geographical questions, the children can also get empowered “to identify technical problems when operating devices and using digital environments, and to solve them (from trouble-shooting to solving more complex problems)” (DigComp 2.0 (Vuorikari et al. 2016, p. 9)). They learn to:

158

D. Schmeinck

assess needs and to identify, evaluate, select and use digital tools and possible technological responses to solve them. To adjust and customise digital environments to personal needs (e.g. accessibility). (…) To use digital tools and technologies to create knowledge and to innovate processes and products. To engage individually and collectively in cognitive processing to understand and resolve conceptual problems and problem situations in digital environments. (…) To understand where one’s own digital competence needs to be improved or updated. To be able to support others with their digital competence development. To seek opportunities for self-development and to keep up-to-date with the digital evolution (ebd.).

Thus, Geography teaching can make a decisive contribution to facilitating learners’ digital competence concerning communication and collaboration.

Conclusion The examples provided in this chapter outline selected ideas for the implementation of digital media in the teaching of primary geography, aiming to both improve geographical teaching and learning and at the same time facilitate learners’ digital competence. Numerous other teaching scenarios would have been conceivable and possible here. The aim of teaching primary science and the social sciences, and thus, primary geography, is to help learners to understand their natural, cultural, social and technical environment in a relevant way, to develop it based on education and to orientate, participate and act in it (Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts (GDSU 2013). When taught effectively, the study of geography: helps people understand and appreciate how places and landscapes are formed, how people and environments interact, the consequences arising from our everyday spatial decisions, and Earth’s diverse and interconnected mosaic of cultures and societies. Therefore, geography is a vital subject and resource for 21st-century citizens living in a tightly interconnected world. It enables us to face questions of what it means to live sustainably in this world. (…) Geographical perspectives help deepen understanding of many contemporary challenges such as climate change, water management, food security, energy choices, overexploitation of natural resources and urbanisation (IGU 2016, p. 5).

Teachers who want to implement such tasks face the demanding and complex challenge of linking up to the pre-and extracurricular knowledge, competencies, interests and learning needs of the learners, but also to connect them with the aims of the natural and social science disciplines and their relevant subject-specific ways of thinking, working and acting (Schmeinck and Hennemann 2014). Digital media thereby open up numerous new educational opportunities and potentials. However, there are no representative empirical studies proving that primary school children generally learn better with digital media. Initial studies in secondary education show that the use of appropriate media has a positive effect on learning success, and at least on the willingness of the students to learn (Schaumburg et  al. 2007). However, the examples show the enormous potential of digital media for teaching primary geography. Digital media can support learning and cognitive processes in

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

159

geography lessons in such a way that includes the development of the understanding of geography as a science process (scientific literacy in the form of data acquisition and communication). Learning geography helps formulate questions; it helps develop intellectual skills and the ability to respond to issues. Geography provides access to 21st-century skills and investigative tools such as maps, fieldwork and the use of powerful digital communication technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) (IGU 2016). The current and future opportunities of primary school children in the digital world depend very much on how we prepare them for life in this digitised world. To help children to become geographically competent as well as digitally savvy in an increasingly globalised and digital world and thus to support the five central areas of digital competence described in the European Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (DigComp), it is indispensable that teachers select lesson content and methods in which digital media can be integrated meaningfully and with added value for the teaching and learning processes. The teachers should reflect on the different learning processes with the children. In this way, digital media will add value to the teaching of lesson content. It will also facilitate learners’ digital competence, thus empowering them to use media safely, creatively, and responsibly.

References Bilal D (2000) Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web Search Engine: I. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. J Am Soc Infor Sci Technol 51(7):646–665 Bilal D (2002) Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web Search Engine: III. Cognitive and physical behaviors on fully self-generated search tasks. J Am Soc Infor Sci Technol 53(13):1170–1183 Döbeli Honegger B (2016) Mehr als 0 und 1: Schule in einer digitalisierten Welt. hep verlag, Bern Druin A, Foss E, Hatley L, Golub E, Guha ML, Fails J, Hutchinson H (2009) How Children Search the Internet with Keyword Interfaces. IDC ‘09 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp 89–96 Eickemann B, Bos W, Vennemann M (2015) Total digital. Wie Jugendliche Kompetenzen im Umgang mit neuen Technologien erwerben. Dokumentation der Analysen des Vertiefungsmoduls zu ICILS 2013. Waxmann, Münster und New York European Commission (2010a) A digital Agenda for Europe, COM (2010) 245 final European Commission (2010b) Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, COM (2010) 2020 European Parliament and the Council (2006) Recommendation of the European Parliament and the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, L394/310 Ferrari A (2012) Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks. Joint Research Centre (JRC), European Commission, Sevilla Ferrari A (2013) DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg Gesellschaft für Didaktik des Sachunterrichts (GDSU) (2013) Perspektivrahmen Sachunterricht. Vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Ausgabe. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI) (2000) Empfehlungen für ein Gesamtkonzept zur informatischen Bildung an allgemein bildenden Schulen. http://www.gi-­ev.de/fileadmin/redaktion/empfehlungen/gesamtkonzept_26_9_2000.pdf. 20.07.2021

160

D. Schmeinck

Goodchild MF, Kemp KK (1990) The NCGIA core curriculum in GIS.  National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, Santa Barbara Hartl D et al (2006) GPS und Geocaching als Medium der Umweltbildung. In: Jekel T et al (eds) Lernen mit Geoinformationen. Wichmann, Heidelberg, pp 70–78 Hemmer M, Wrenger K (2016) Förderung der Kartenkompetenz im Sachunterricht. In: Adamina M, Hemmer M, Schubert JC (eds) Die geographische Perspektive konkret. Begleitband 3 zum Perspektivrahmen Sachunterricht. Julius Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn, pp 179–186 Hennig S, Vogler R (2011) WebMapping: Der Einsatz von digitalen, interaktiven Karten in Schule und Bildung. GW-Unterricht 123:86–99 Hepp A (2018) Von der Mediatisierung zur tiefgreifenden Mediatisierung. Konstruktivistische Grundlagen und Weiterentwicklungen in der Mediatisierungsforschung. In: Reichertz J, Bettmann R (eds) Kommunikation  – Medien  – Konstruktion. Braucht die Mediatisierungsforschung den Kommunikativen Konstruktivismus? Springer, Wiesbaden, pp 27–45 HERODOT (2008) GIS in secondary school education: A benchmark statement. http://www. herodot.net/geography-­benchmark.html. 20.07.2021 Ilomäki L, Paavola S, Lakkala M, Kantosalo A (2016) Digital competence – an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Educ Infor Technol 21(3):655–679 International Association for the Evaluation of Education Achievement (IEA) (n.d.) What’s next for IEA’s ICILS in 2018? The IEA’s international computer and information literacy study (ICILS) 2018. http://www.iea.nl/fileadmin/user_upload/Studies/ICILS_2018/IEA_ICILS_2018_ Computational_Thinking_Leaflet.pdf. 20.07.2021 International Geographic Union  – Commission on Geographical Education (IGU CGE) (2016) International Charter on Geographical Education. http://www.igu-­cge.org/Charters-­pdf/2016/ IGU_2016_def.pdf. 17.06.2021 Irion T (2018) Wozu digitale Medien in der Grundschule? Sollte das Thema Digitalisierung in der Grundschule tabuisiert werden? Grundschule aktuell 142:3–7 Irion T, Sahin H (2018) Digitale Bildung und soziale Ungleichheit. Grundschule 2:33–35 Kestler F (2015) Einführung in die Didaktik des Geographieunterrichts. Grundlagen der Geographiedidaktik einschließlich ihrer Bezugswissenschaften. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn Koller A (2010) Geocaching – Ein Impuls für den GW- Unterricht?! GW Unterricht 119:1–10 Makki T, O’Neal L, Cotten S, Rikard R (2018) When first-order barriers are high: A comparison of second- and third-order barriers to classroom computing integration. Computer Educ 120:90–97 Medienberatung NRW (2018) Medienkompetenzrahmen NRW. Münster/Düsseldorf. https://medienkompetenzrahmen.nrw.de/fileadmin/pdf/LVR_ZMB_MKR_Broschuere_2018_08_Final. pdf. 20.07.2021 Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (mpfs) (2015) KIM-Studie 2014. Kinder + Medien, Computer + Internet. Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 6- bis 13-Jähriger in Deutschland. Stuttgart. https://www.mpfs.de/fileadmin/files/Studien/KIM/2014/KIM_ Studie_2014.pdf. 20.07.2021 Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (mpfs) (2017) KIM-Studie 2016. Kindheit, Internet, Medien. Basisstudie zum Medienumgang 6- bis 13-Jähriger in Deutschland. Stuttgart. Online: https://www.mpfs.de/fileadmin/files/Studien/KIM/2016/KIM_2016_Web-­PDF.pdf. 20.07.2021 Schaumburg H, Prasse D, Tschackert K, Bömeke S (2007) Lernen in Notebook-Klassen. Endbericht zur Evaluation des Projekts „1000mal1000: Notebooks im Schulranzen“. Selbstverlag, Bonn. Schleicher Y (2006) Digitale Medien und E-Learning motivierend einsetzen. In: Haubrich H (ed) Geographie unterrichten lernen. Cornelsen, Stuttgart, pp 207–221 Schmeinck D (2013a) Wie heißt dein Passwort? – Passwortsicherheit und Umgang mit persönlichen Daten im Internet. Grundschule 12:20–22 Schmeinck D (2013b) Digital Natives und Prosumer  – Medienkompetenz in der Grundschule. Grundschule 12:6–7

The Role of Geography in Facilitating Learners’ Digital Competence

161

Schmeinck D (2013c) Digitale Geomedien und Realtime Geografies. Konsequenzen für den Sachunterricht. In: Fischer H-J, Giest H, Pech D (eds) Sachunterricht und seine Didaktik. Bestände prüfen und Perspektiven entwickeln. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn, pp 187–194 Schmeinck D (2016a) Grenzen und Möglichkeiten digitaler (Geo)Medien beim geographischen Lernen in der Grundschule. In: Peschel M und Irion T (eds) Neue Medien in der Grundschule 2.0. Grundlagen – Konzepte – Perspektiven. Band 141. Grundschulverband, Frankfurt/Main, pp 135–143 Schmeinck D (2016b) Digitale (Geo)Medien in der Grundschule  – Mit GPS-Geräten dem Koordinatennetz der Erde auf der Spur. In: Adamina M, Hemmer M, Schubert JC (eds) Die geographische Perspektive konkret. Begleitband 3 zum Perspektivrahmen. Sachunterricht. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn, pp 215–223 Schmeinck D (2018a) Gestaltung neuer Lehr- und Lernprozesse. Wie setze ich Tablets im Sachunterricht effektiv ein? Sachunterricht Weltwissen 1:2–3 Schmeinck D (2018b) Wenn Roboter laufen lernen. Programmieren in der Grundschule. Sachunterricht Weltwissen 1:42–43 Schmeinck D (2019) More than just coding – promoting a media literacy in Primary School. In: Nguyen TL, Do VH (eds) Competency-based learning and teacher education. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Innovation in Learning Instruction and Teacher Education – ILITE 1. University of Education Publishing House, Hanoi, pp 462–471 Schmeinck, D. & Hennemann, T. (2014). „Was sollen wir denn noch alles können?!“ Kompetenzen in der LehrerInnenbildung aus Sicht der Sonderpädagogik und des Sachunterrichts. In Bresges, A., Dilger, B., Hennemann T., König, J., Lindner, H., Rohde, A. & Schmeinck, D. (eds.). Kompetenzen diskursiv. Terminologische, exemplarische und strukturelle Klärungen in der LehrerInnenbildung. pp. 49-80. Münster und New York: Waxmann. Sekretariat der Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK) (2016) Strategie der Kultusministerkonferenz „Bildung in der digitalen Welt“. Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 08. Dezember 2016. Berlin. Ständige Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2012) Medienbildung in der Schule. Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz vom 8. März 2012. Berlin. Traun C, Jekel T, Loidl M, Vogler R, Ferber N, Gryl I (2013) Neue Forschungsansätze der Kartographie und ihr Potential für den Unterricht. GW Unterricht 129:5–17 Vetter M, Barnikel F, Pingold M, Plötz R (2012) Untersuchung zur Verwendung digitaler und analoger Karten im Erdkundeunterricht unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Raumorientierung. In: Hüttermann A, Kirchner P, Schuler S, Drieling K (eds) Räumliche Orientierung. Räumliche Orientierung, Karten und Geoinformation im Unterricht. Westermann, Braunschweig, pp 227–241 Voženílek V (2009) Geoinformatics as an important resource in geography teaching. In: Schmeinck D (ed) Teaching geography in and for Europe. Mensch & Buch, Berlin, pp 79–91 Vuorikari R, Punie Y, Carretero GS, Van den Brande G (2016) DigComp 2.0: the digital competence framework for citizens. Update phase 1: the conceptual reference model. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg Wagner U, Eggert S, Schubert G (2016) MoFam – Mobile Medien in der Familie. Langfassung der Studie. Langfassung. https://www.jff.de/fileadmin/user_upload/jff/projekte/mofam/JFF_ MoFam1_gesamtStudie.pdf. 28.02.2021

Setting the Foundation – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography Daniela Schmeinck and Gillian Kidman

Abstract  What knowledge, skills and attitudes do children and young people need to be able to deal with the uncertain and complex issues of today and tomorrow, to question our current actions and to learn from the mistakes of the past? And how can primary school geography make a decisive contribution to these knowledge, skills and attitudes? The chapter addresses these questions and summarises the results of current teaching and learning research for geography teaching in primary school. To help the geographical community better understand primary school geography and offer new ideas for high-quality and future-oriented geography teaching, this chapter provides an expert discussion based on current teaching and learning research on geography teaching in primary school. The chapter argues why geography in primary school must be a compulsory subject based on a multi-perspective, integrative and problem-solving approach. The chapter concludes with a Framework for Primary Geography Education, which highlights the essential present and future learnings, indicating three critical goals: dispositions, knowledge, and responsibility.

Keywords  Primary school geography · Geographical knowledge · Skills and attitudes · Dispositions

“But you’re a geographer!” “That's right,” said the geographer, “but I'm not an explorer. And I don’t have explorers here. It is not the geographer who counts cities, rivers, mountains, seas, oceans, and deserts. The geographer is too important to wander around. He does

D. Schmeinck (*) Institute of Primary Science and Social Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: [email protected] G. Kidman Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4_11

163

164

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

not leave his office. But he receives the explorers there. He asks them questions and takes notes of their memories.” (de Saint-Exupéry 2019)

Contrary to the statement of the geographer in de Saint-Exupéry, the methods in geography are not limited to the simple questioning of scientists and the gathering of information. Nor is the teaching of Geography in primary school based on the mere imparting of information. But the question about the goals, tasks, and the meaning of Geography in the classroom is not unfounded (Kidman and Schmeinck 2022). The International Charters on Geographical Education, published in 1992 and 2016 by the International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE), indicates that effectively taught geography lessons can fascinate and inspire people: Whether it is through appreciating the beauty of Earth, the immense power of Earth-shaping forces or the often ingenious ways in which people create their living in different environments and circumstances, studying geography helps people to understand and appreciate how places and landscapes are formed, how people and environments interact, the consequences that arise from our everyday spatial decisions, and Earth’s diverse and interconnected mosaic of cultures and societies. (pp. 4–5)

Additionally, teaching effectively and ensuring the quality of teaching and learning of geography lessons can enable the learner to ask questions of what it means to live sustainably in this world and to understand human relationships and their responsibilities to both the natural environment and others. Also, a geographical education can help people learn how to exist harmoniously with all living species (p. 5). Geographical perspectives help deepen understanding of many contemporary challenges such as climate change, food security, energy choices, overexploitation of natural resources and urbanization. Teaching geography serves several vital educational goals. Building on people’s own experiences, learning geography helps them to formulate questions, develop their intellectual skills and respond to issues affecting their lives. It introduces them not only to key 21st century skills but also to distinctive investigative tools such as maps, fieldwork and the use of powerful digital communication technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS).” (International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education. (IGU-CGE 2016, p. 5)

However, suppose geography lessons are about the development of values and attitudes. In that case, it seems indispensable that these lessons occur regularly in primary school so that children of primary school age learn to understand the world and act responsibly in it (Kidman & Schmeinck (2022). Still, this then raises the question of how primary school geography can make a decisive contribution here. The starting point of geographic learning processes is the experiences and the life world of the children (Harder 2022). Based on the children’s learning experiences and considering their individual needs, Geography lessons provide a framework for learners to develop their experiences through fact-based learning activities and acquire key competencies. Within this framework, learners should become autonomous learners, supported by stimulating learning opportunities of personal relevance, a factually based sequencing of content, and appropriate stimulation, assistance, and feedback from teachers. Nevertheless, while in school, intentionality

Setting the Foundation – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography

165

is a fundamental feature of teaching, and the context of observation is determined by the teacher, the everyday life experience with a particular (geographic) phenomenon is usually neither intentional nor imbedded in a (geo)scientific context. Therefore, as a critical outcome of primary geography teaching, Harder (2022) demands that the lessons need to support learners in developing their mental coherence. However, the children’s experiences and lifeworld are not the only decisive factors in learning. Children's questions also have considerable developmental, learning, and educational potential and should not be ignored in teaching. Based on her analysis of student questions in primary geography classrooms, Kidman (2022) concludes that student-generated questions and a natural discourse about geographic concepts and ideas can promote learners’ thinking skills. Moreover, the skills gained by the children asking geographical questions can be transferred to other areas of learning. Kidman, therefore, calls on teachers to facilitate this amazing ability of children and to give students more frequent opportunities to discuss their ideas both in small groups and as a whole class, and by doing so also giving learners a voice. In addition, learner-centred pedagogies, such as fieldwork in which students can get a personal and holistic experience with the outside and real-world (Lang and Quon 2022), or inquiry-based practices that support the creation of rich and thoughtful reasoning in lessons that promote geographical knowledge creation and skill development (Kidman and Chakraborty 2022) play a crucial role in the learning process of the primary school student. By implementing learner-centred pedagogies, primary geography teaching provides the conditions for learners to reflect on their experiences and knowledge to develop and implement new ideas and related courses of action, build critical attitudes, and make evaluative judgments. Geography teaching in primary school thus supports systematic, reflective, and sustained learning. It considers the children's questions and patterns of interpretation and helps them express, present and communicate their explanations and reasons appropriately. Nevertheless, the learner-centred pedagogies and subject-specific forms of teaching and learning alone do not lead to the requested spatial action competence that children will need to develop. In connection to considering the children's experiences and lifeworld’s, digital media also play a decisive role. In this context, Schmeinck (2022) argues that geography, due to its specific approach, not only contributes to reconstructing the complex, digitally shaped reality of life didactically across subjects it can also enable children to learn about media. The use of digital media in geography teaching and learning can also support the learning and cognitive processes so that they promote the understanding of geography as a scientific process (scientific literacy) and thus enable learning with and through media. Finally, the use of digital media in geography lessons promotes learners’ digital literacy and enables them to use media safely, creatively, and responsibly. The implementation of digital media in geography lessons thus helps promote learners’ digital literacy in an increasingly globalised and digital world, supporting the five key areas of digital literacy described in the European Framework for Digital Competences for Citizens (DigComp).

166

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

“Geographies,” said the geographer, “are the finest books of all. They never go out of fashion. It is extremely rare for a mountain to change position. It is extremely rare for an ocean to be drained of its water. We write eternal things.” (de Saint-Exupéry 2019)

Even in the school context, the mythical ideal of the objective map described here still prevails in many cases (Gryl 2010, p. 29). The subjectivity of the representations, and thus the subjectivity of spatial perceptions, the closely related constructed-­ ness of social spaces, are often not considered in the primary classroom. For example, according to the different curricula in Germany, children are usually introduced to “maps” from the 3rd school year onwards. However, this does not consider children's extensive extracurricular experiences today, e.g. by dealing with digital geomedia (e.g. Bing Maps, Google Maps or Google Earth) (Schmeinck 2022). Due to Google Earth, OpenStreetMap (OSM) and others – at least from a technical point of view – there seem to be few “unknown places” these days. Massive databases with geocoded data and information turn the “virtual earth” into a virtual, navigable space. Spatial distances are overcome seemingly effortlessly thanks to the Street View option. Information about spaces, previously experienced indirectly, is now immediately accessible and tangible. Immediate spatial experiences of primary school children and the increasing globalisation, the growing mobility of the population, the rising flood of information through the media, and the ever-increasing range of international consumer goods are having a significant impact on children's experiences (Schmeinck 2013). Spatial orientation patterns and classification systems (e.g., cardinal points or the earth's coordinate system) help learners understand natural and anthropogenic processes and phenomena, classify them, relate them to each other, and make them available for their future actions and decisions. The ability to organise geographical facts and phenomena and recognise existing interconnections and interdependencies is an essential requirement for a critical, and at the same time, constructive and active engagement with the world. The promotion of spatial orientation skills in familiar and unfamiliar spaces plays a central role in geographical education. In addition to the acquisition of basic, topographical orientation knowledge, this also includes promoting the ability to orient oneself in real space, a basic map competence, and the conscious reflection of subjective spatial perceptions. Spatial orientation competence thus comprises much more than just basic topographic knowledge (Schmeinck 2013). Yet, spatial thinking also plays a vital role in acquiring geographical knowledge and skills and is related to the development of spatial skills (Bednarz et al. 2022). However, Bednarz, Jo and Shin also note that there are often substantial differences in spatial abilities among primary school children. Differences result from their socio-economic status, gender, and other factors. Therefore, the authors call for primary school geography teachers to promote spatial thinking for all children so that these known differences are reduced and that all children can develop highly competent spatial thinking. Thus, it is a crucial task of primary school geography lessons to promote the geography-specific and spatial ways of thinking, working and acting. These form the basis for spatial thinking and spatial action competence. If children recognise spaces as changeable, usable and

Setting the Foundation – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography

167

presentable, they can also take responsibility for maintaining, caring for and changing spaces. Only in this way can they act in the sense of sustainable futures. But will all these ideas enable children to gain fundamental insights into complex contemporary issues such as mobility, sustainability and climate change? Probably not. At least not as long as geography education is understood, thought of and taught as a specific, stand-alone subject. Based on the analysis of the intended primary school Geography education from both Germany and Australia, Schmeinck and Kidman (2022) conclude that although the curricula in these two countries appear quite different at first glance, the underlying teaching approaches and principles are comparable. Thus, through integrative and multi-perspective approaches, the children in both countries can learn systematically and reflectively and shape their environment. The learners should gain fundamental insights into complex situations, problem areas and the interdependencies of environment, society, and economy. Both approaches presented also pursue the goal of linking to the children's life experiences and interests and the subject disciplines of secondary schools, thereby contributing equally to the development of the children's present and future learning as outlined by Wi (2022). To prepare learners for a sustainable future, geography education in primary school already needs to be thought of and taught in a multi-­ perspective and integrated way. Therefore, the authors recommend “Children need to learn integrative thinking and the ability to solve societal problems as outlined by Klafki (1992), and that persists today under the guise of the UNESCO 2030 SDGs” (Schmeinck and Kidman 2022). Casinader (2022) also emphasises the importance of primary geography education in providing a cultural understanding that meets the needs of our increasingly global society. He describes the fundamental nature of geography and its potential as a forum for transcultural education. However, he also criticises that so far, too little attention has been paid to this area. According to Casinader, the development of cultural understanding requires a change in people's attitudes, which cannot be achieved in a short period or through single classroom activities. Therefore, he calls for lessons in primary school that reflect the immersive nature of learning experiences to support the development of transcultural understanding.

A Concluding Framework The chapters of this book underline the importance of a geographical education that empowers children and youth with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to engage with the uncertain and complex issues of today and in the future and to take humanity forward. We have synthesised the ideas presented in this book into the following Framework for Primary Geography Education. The Framework highlights the essential present and future learnings, indicating three critical goals: dispositions, knowledge, and responsibility (Fig. 1). A primary school geographical education needs to help students question their present actions and learn from the past mistakes of others. We need to enable

168

D. Schmeinck and G. Kidman

Fig. 1  Framework for Primary Geography Education

learners to think critically about the issues facing their world in the present and the future so that they are ready and able to stand up for their beliefs at all times. In a world dominated by digital data and media, in which, for example, scale dimensions can be changed by simply zooming in and out, and geographical information is made available to everyone on the Internet without any restrictions, the tasks and goals of geographical education in primary school must also be regularly and critically questioned. High quality and forward-looking geography teaching develop knowledge and understanding, skills, attitudes, and values. Primary school geography needs to be a mandated subject based on a multi-perspective, systematic and problem-solving approach. It has a goal of developing an engaged outward disposition with a desire to change the world for the better based on knowledge and a sense of responsibility.

References Bednarz SW, Jo I, Shin E (2022) Spatial thinking in primary geography. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 133–144 Casinader N (2022) Cultural Perspectives in Primary Geography. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 45–60 de Saint-Exupéry A (2019) The Little Prince. (First published in 1943; Original: Le Petit Prince). Alma Books, Surrey Gryl I (2010) Mündigkeit durch Reflexion. Überlegungen zu einer multiperspektivischen Kartenarbeit. GW Unterricht 118:20–37 Harder M (2022) Primary geography and conceptual change. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 61–79 International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE) (1992) International Charter on Geographical Education. IGU-CGE, Freiburg International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education (IGU-CGE) (2016) The 2016 International Charter on Geography Education. IGU-CGE, Beijing Kidman G (2022) Geographical question typologies: Student-generated questions. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 81–92

Setting the Foundation – Educational Opportunities of and Needs for Primary Geography

169

Kidman G, Chakraborty D (2022) Inquiry-based practices in primary school Geography. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 95–111 Kidman G, Schmeinck D (2022) Defining geography in the Primary School: classroom experiences and understandings. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 1–11 Klafki W (1992) Allgemeinbildung in der Grundschule und der Bildungsauftrag des Sachunterrichts. In: Lauterbach R et  al (eds) Brennpunkte des Sachunterrichts. IPN, Kiel, pp 11–31 Lang C, Quon C (2022) Fieldwork in Primary Geography: Australia. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 113–131 Schmeinck D (2013) Elementare geografische Bildung in der Grundschule. Herausforderungen für den Sachunterricht. Grundschulmagazin 3:7–10 Schmeinck D (2022) The role of geography in facilitating learners’ digital competence. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 145–161 Schmeinck D, Kidman G (2022) The integrated nature of Geography education in German and Australian primary schools. In: Kidman G, Schmeinck D (eds) Setting the foundation: big ideas in teaching primary geography. Springer, Cham, pp 15–27

Index

A Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures, 119, 124 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, 119 Aboriginal artworks, 124 Academic geography, 2, 41 Acceptance, v, 46, 48, 49, 86 Accommodation, 62, 67, 125 Achievement standards, 52 Action plan, 5, 6, 54, 150 Advanced GeoSkills, vi, 9, 10 Agent of change, vi, 6–10 Alternative conceptions, 24, 85 Analogue, 155 Analysing, 24, 34, 97, 107, 114, 117, 129, 140, 146 Appreciative inquiry, 93, 96, 110 Argumentation, 8, 100, 107, 109 Assimilation, 62, 67 Assumptions, 31, 62–65, 75 Asylum seekers, v, 4 Attitude, vi, 4–10, 42, 48, 49, 53, 57–59, 66, 110, 148, 164, 165, 167, 168 Attitudinal change, vi Australia, 13, 16, 17, 19, 22, 24, 25, 46, 50–53, 55, 56, 83, 97, 113–130, 167 Australian Curriculum, 22, 25, 52, 54, 82–83, 97, 98, 102, 113–115, 117, 119 Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), 3, 19, 22, 23, 52, 82, 83, 97, 102, 114–116, 118, 119, 124, 127, 130

B Basic Curriculum, 6 Bing Maps, 166 Biophysical processes, 3 C Capabilities, 34, 46, 47, 51, 53, 57, 146 Causal relations, 3, 81 Cause and effect, 23, 87, 101 Challenges, v, 7, 17–19, 21, 24, 25, 41–43, 48, 63, 71, 85, 116, 139, 140, 146, 150–153, 158, 164 Citizen, v, 5, 7, 55, 150, 158, 159, 165 Citizenship, 22, 55, 114, 154 Civics and citizenship, 22, 24, 113, 118 Classroom goals, 99, 100, 109 Climate change, v, 4, 13, 18, 31, 152, 158, 164, 167 Cognitive, 19, 37, 63–67, 82–84, 86, 88–90, 93, 120, 134–136, 141, 142, 158, 165 disequilibrium, 85 verb usage, 83 Collaborative learning, 96 Communicating, 37, 97, 109, 114, 127, 153 Community, v, vi, 4, 7, 18, 30, 37, 54–59, 115–117, 121, 124, 126, 134, 136 Competence, 6, 7, 20, 21, 26, 51, 150, 153, 157, 165, 166 Complexity, 13, 17, 21, 46, 48, 52, 61, 69, 88, 90, 141 Conceptions, 14, 24, 36, 63, 65–67, 69–77 Conceptual capture, 62

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Kidman, D. Schmeinck (eds.), Teaching Primary Geography, Key Challenges in Geography, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99970-4

171

172 Conceptual change, 13, 61–77, 86 Conceptual exchange, 62 Conceptual understanding, 30–31, 85, 101, 107 Confidence, 41, 93, 104 Connections, 3, 6, 7, 13, 19, 23, 36, 39, 41, 43, 52, 56, 64, 67, 74, 75, 81, 117, 119–121, 124–127, 134, 136, 139, 147, 157, 165 Constructivism, 69, 96 Content, 3, 17, 20–22, 24, 25, 31, 34, 39, 41, 63, 68, 70–72, 76, 81, 100, 106, 109, 148, 149, 151, 152, 154–157, 159, 164 Contexts, 2, 3, 5, 7, 26, 30, 38, 39, 46, 48, 51–54, 56, 57, 59, 63, 65–67, 69, 70, 72, 77, 82, 85, 86, 89, 97, 111, 114, 117, 120, 125, 134, 136, 137, 139, 149, 151, 154, 156, 157, 165, 166 Continuity and change, 23 COVID-19, v, 29–31, 42, 43, 147, 153 Creativity, 7, 42, 84, 93, 127, 129, 152 Critical reflection, 96 Critical thinking, 4, 42, 84, 90, 96, 100, 107, 109, 110, 152 Cross-cultural interactions, 46 Cross-curricula integration, 8 Cross-curriculum priority, 93, 119–120, 124 Cross-disciplinary learning, 3, 81 Cultural education, 47–49, 57 Cultural harmony, 51 Cultural understanding, 13, 47, 50–55, 57, 59, 167 Culture, 22, 23, 31, 42, 45–49, 51–53, 55, 56, 58, 114, 119, 157, 158, 164 Curiosity, 3, 31, 46, 52, 96, 97, 109, 110, 114, 124 Curricula, v, 5–9, 13, 15–17, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 31, 33, 34, 39, 40, 45–47, 50–57, 83, 97–99, 104, 115, 116, 118, 120–123, 125–127, 129, 130, 138, 139, 141, 142, 150, 166, 167 Cyberbullying, 156 D Data, 2, 7, 65, 67–69, 71, 72, 75, 88, 96–98, 101, 104, 107, 110, 114, 116, 117, 121, 123, 127, 134, 146, 150–157, 159, 166, 168 Data resources, 33, 39 Decision making, 42, 56, 58, 84, 107, 114, 146

Index Declarative, 20, 21, 26 Degree of teacher direction, 99, 100, 109 Diagrams, 104, 134, 140 Difference, 37–39, 41, 42, 46–49, 52–55, 58, 65, 67, 71, 72, 75, 83, 86, 116, 127, 136, 137, 166 Digital competence, 146–159, 165 Digital content creation, 150, 154–156 Digital devices, 147, 157 Digital environments, 152, 154, 156–158 Digital mapping tools, 33, 39 Digital maps, 146, 154, 155, 157 Digital media, 93, 147–149, 152–159, 165 Digital platforms, 127 Digital technologies, 115, 116, 123, 127, 129, 146, 147, 149, 154, 156 Disciplinary boundaries, 42 Disciplinary knowledge, 41 Discipline, 2–6, 19, 20, 22, 24, 26, 32–34, 47, 50–54, 66, 71, 82, 83, 90, 91, 96, 110, 111, 113, 118, 123, 134, 136, 138, 142, 150, 152, 158, 167 Discipline-specific investigative tools, vi, 10 Dispositions, vi, 5, 9, 94, 110, 114, 167, 168 E Economy, 13, 20–23, 25, 29, 42, 152, 167 Empower, vi, 7, 18, 167 Engagement, 17, 37, 55, 84, 93, 110, 115, 117, 118, 121, 127, 129, 166 Environment, vi, 3–5, 7, 13, 17, 19–23, 25, 30–31, 41, 42, 46, 47, 49, 51, 54, 58, 65, 69, 75, 82, 84, 89, 97, 101, 102, 110, 113, 114, 116, 117, 135, 138, 139, 146, 152, 154, 158, 164, 167 Environmental, 7, 16, 23, 25, 30, 39, 51, 82, 88, 95, 96, 114, 116, 117, 119, 121, 124, 137, 140, 156 justice, 3, 4 responsibility, 4 Ethical consequences, 8 European, 120, 147, 148, 150, 151, 159, 165 European colonisation, 48, 119 Evaluating, 36, 87, 97, 107–109, 114, 138 Excursions, 24, 101, 116–118, 122, 123, 127 Experiences, 1–10, 16, 20, 21, 23, 26, 30, 31, 35, 39, 41, 43, 46, 53–59, 64, 69, 76, 77, 85, 93, 96, 98, 101–105, 108–110, 114, 115, 117–120, 122–125, 127, 129, 130, 134, 138–140, 142, 147, 150, 151, 153, 164–167 Exploration, 3, 34, 86, 118, 119

Index F Fieldwork, 6, 10, 17, 93, 96, 101, 113–130, 159, 164, 165 Fieldwork imperative, 121 Finland, 13, 50, 51, 123 Framework for Primary Geography Education, vi, 94, 167, 168 Future, vi, 3, 4, 6, 13, 16, 19, 22–24, 26, 40, 42–43, 46, 49, 62, 82, 90, 94, 114, 138, 148, 149, 152, 159, 166–168 Future Problem Solving, 55, 57 G General Capabilities, 52 Generic skills, 9, 51 Geocapabilities, 53 Geodata, 155, 156 Geographical content, 13, 25, 77, 86, 102 Geographical empathy, 4 Geographical inquiry, 49, 82, 84, 87, 93, 96–104, 106, 107, 109–111 Geographical inquiry pedagogical principles, 93, 110, 111 Geographical literacy, 3, 82 Geographical processes, 24, 114 Geographic information systems (GIS), 134, 146, 159, 164 Geographic literacy, 137 Geographic perspective, 3, 5, 82, 147 Geographic reasoning, 3, 5, 82 Geoinformatics, 146 Geoinformatic technologies (GIT), 146 Geoinformatisation, 146 Geomedia, 156, 166 Geo-scientific centering subject, 2 German Geographical Society, 6 Germany, 6, 13, 16, 19, 25, 50, 71, 166, 167 Global, v, vi, 3, 5, 8, 18, 23, 26, 29–31, 35, 40, 43, 46, 51–57, 82, 114, 116, 118, 119, 137, 152, 167 citizenship, 4, 30 education, 53–58 inequalities, v, 4 understanding, 46, 54 Globalisation, 46, 47, 54, 152, 166 Goal, vi, 6, 8, 17, 18, 45–47, 51, 53, 54, 85, 94, 98, 107, 110, 142, 146, 147, 149, 150, 154, 164, 167, 168 Google Earth, 166 Google Maps, 152, 166

173 H History, 1–3, 22, 24, 47, 51, 52, 61, 62, 82, 83, 86, 90, 97, 113, 118, 119 Humanities, vi, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 17, 19, 22, 24, 25, 35, 51, 53, 81, 83, 90, 167 Humanities and social sciences (HASS), 22–25, 47, 50–52, 97, 98, 102, 113, 114, 118–120, 129 Hypothetico-deductive reasoning ability, 84 I Identity, v, 2, 6, 10, 23, 53, 83, 96, 119, 154 Implications, 7, 13, 24–26, 36, 69–70, 77, 91, 103, 134, 138–139 Independent learning, 93 Indigenous, 22, 48, 56, 124–126 Inquiry, vi, 6, 7, 9, 10, 22, 31, 34, 42, 47, 54–57, 85, 90, 93, 96–100, 102–105, 107–110, 113, 114, 116–118, 130 literacy, 93, 97, 99–102, 109 skills, 22, 83, 98 Inquiry-based practices, 9, 17, 90, 93, 95–111, 165 Institute of Australian Geographers (IAG), 3, 5 Instructional approach, 99, 101, 109 Integrated studies, 2 Integration, 16–19, 38, 54, 65, 96 Intellectual extension, 93, 110 Intellectual sophistication, 14, 83, 84, 87–91 Interact, 23, 30, 31, 42, 84, 154, 158, 164 Interconnections, vi, 13, 30, 97, 115, 116, 166 Intercultural, 48, 49, 52, 53, 55, 57, 59 Intercultural capability, 52, 54, 55, 57, 58 Interdependence, 13, 21, 25, 43, 152 Interdisciplinary, 3, 15, 18, 22, 23, 53, 70, 91, 100, 101, 110, 111, 121, 152, 153 Interests, 17, 20, 21, 26, 29, 31, 33, 43, 52, 65, 82, 86, 90, 96, 97, 99, 102–104, 114, 117, 136, 137, 146, 152, 158, 167 International Charters on Geographical Education, 10, 164 International Geographical Union, 5, 6, 9, 30, 164 International Research in Geography and Environmental Education, 13, 40 Internet, 30, 127, 128, 146, 147, 151–153, 168 Interrelationships, 30 J Jigsaw puzzles, 137, 138 Journals, 13, 32–33, 40, 140

Index

174 K Kindergarten, 17, 29, 30, 43, 115 Knowledge, vi, 2–9, 13, 19–22, 24, 26, 30, 31, 34, 37, 39, 41–43, 49, 51, 53, 54, 56, 61–65, 67–69, 74, 76, 81, 82, 84–86, 90, 94, 96, 97, 100–109, 111, 114, 115, 117, 127, 147, 148, 150, 152–155, 158, 165–168 L Landscapes, vi, 50, 101, 127, 155, 158, 164 Language, 2, 21, 84, 87, 88, 93, 97–101, 109–111, 119–121, 125, 134, 137, 140, 151, 153 Learning, v, vi, 2, 3, 5–9, 13, 17, 18, 20–26, 30–31, 33, 34, 38, 39, 41–43, 46–59, 63, 65–67, 69, 77, 82, 84–88, 90, 91, 93–104, 108–110, 116–121, 123, 127, 129, 130, 134, 136, 137, 139, 140, 142, 147–159, 164, 165, 167 progressions, 98, 134, 136, 140 skills, 42 Literacy skills, 42, 102 Local area, 93, 96, 115 Location, 23, 29, 34, 38, 39, 42, 45, 46, 50, 52, 65, 82, 101, 114, 116–118, 122, 124, 126, 127, 134, 146 M Mandated subject, 5, 168 Mapping, 24, 93, 114, 117, 125, 137, 140, 155 Maps, 4, 9, 96, 106, 114, 116–118, 124–126, 128, 134, 137, 140, 142, 146, 154, 155, 157, 159, 164, 166 Media, 16, 30, 42, 47, 75, 100, 127, 146–152, 155–159, 165, 166, 168 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians, 22 Mental models, 63, 64 Mental rotations, 135–137 Middle Schools, 46 Migration, v, 4, 48, 51, 118, 152 Mindsets, 9 Misconceptions, 63, 64 Mixed modal approach, 125 Mobility, 13, 48, 135, 157, 166, 167 Monocultural, 51 Moral, 6, 7, 29, 34, 38, 39, 42, 45, 46, 50, 52, 65, 82, 101, 114, 116–118, 122, 124, 126, 127, 134 Multicultural, 48, 49, 51, 53, 55–57

Multiculturalism, 48, 49 Multi-perspective, 5, 13, 17, 20, 25, 26, 94, 151, 167, 168 MyMaps, 127 N National curriculum, 13, 50–53, 129 Natural sciences, 2, 19, 20 Nature, vi, 10, 15–26, 30, 31, 38, 46–49, 53, 57, 59, 70, 82–84, 86, 87, 90, 91, 97, 103, 104, 115, 119, 135, 139, 167 Networked technologies, 146 Ngunnawal, 124 O OpenStreetMap (OSM), 166 Outdoor learning, 121 Overcrowded curriculum, 17, 22 P Pandemic, v, 29–32, 42, 43 Participatory action research, 7 Patterns, 18, 21, 23, 32, 33, 66, 90, 107, 116, 135, 142, 146, 157, 165 Pedagogical approach, 93, 105, 119 Pedagogical decision-making, 111 Pedagogical map, 105 Pedagogical principles, 110, 111 Pedagogical routines, 111 Pedagogies, 17, 34, 93, 96, 101, 109, 110, 121, 130, 165 Personal Interest, 93, 110 Perspective Framework for General Studies in Primary Education (Sachunterricht), 19–21 Perspectives and action, 23 Phenomena, 1, 3, 5, 16, 20, 33, 52, 62, 64, 65, 71, 72, 75–77, 81, 82, 85, 87, 88, 107, 114, 137, 146, 152, 165, 166 Physical Sciences, vi, 10 Place, 3–5, 7, 22, 23, 29–31, 34, 38, 39, 41, 43, 46, 47, 49, 50, 52, 54–59, 65, 75, 77, 82, 85, 95–97, 101, 106, 110, 114, 116, 117, 119–121, 124, 127, 135, 140, 151, 155, 158, 164, 166 Policy, v, 6, 16, 29, 51, 54, 58, 121, 122, 156 Populations, v, 4, 16, 23, 47, 50, 51, 166 Positivity, 96 Preconceptions, 41, 63 Prior knowledge, 31, 63, 85, 89, 104, 108, 110

Index Problems of society, 16–17, 19 Problem-solving, 5, 19, 55, 57, 90, 94, 96, 114, 134, 139, 150, 156–158, 168 Procedural, 20, 21, 84, 86 Progressive curriculum, 59 Q Questioning, 3–6, 14, 82–86, 90, 91, 97, 98, 101–104, 107, 109, 110, 114, 164 Questions, 3–6, 10, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24–26, 31, 40, 41, 43, 67, 71, 81–91, 96–99, 101–104, 106, 107, 110, 113, 141, 142, 147, 150–159, 164, 165, 167 R Reasoning, 10, 84, 85, 90, 111, 134–136, 139, 141, 165 Reflecting, 55, 97, 107–109, 115 Reflections, 47, 51, 93, 98, 99, 108, 110, 114, 117, 166 Refugees, v, 4 Relationships, 2–4, 13, 14, 16, 19, 21, 23, 25, 31, 43, 47–50, 56, 81, 83, 87, 89, 91, 106, 107, 110, 116, 136–139, 146, 164 Re-learning, 61 Representations, 23, 135, 140–142, 166 Researching, 97, 104–107, 114, 127, 151, 152 Resources, 3, 17, 18, 23, 32, 41, 101, 102, 114–116, 118–119, 123, 127, 129, 154, 158, 164 Respectful Productivity, 93, 110 Responsibility, vi, 6, 7, 16, 25, 30, 31, 50, 54–56, 94, 110, 119, 122, 123, 164, 167, 168 Rivers, 4, 14, 63, 71–77, 88, 118, 163 S Sachunterricht, 13, 16, 17, 19–22, 25, 158 Safety, 102, 108, 120, 121, 150, 156 Science, 2, 3, 5, 8, 16, 17, 19–22, 24–26, 35, 51, 54, 61, 65, 68–70, 77, 81, 83, 86, 90, 93, 99–101, 106, 110, 114, 120, 121, 124, 134, 136–138, 146, 153, 155, 157–159 Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEMs), 25, 85, 120, 130, 136, 138, 139 Scientific, 20, 25, 61–65, 67, 70, 77, 93, 96, 121, 153, 157, 159, 165 Secondary schools, v, vi, 3–6, 19, 20, 26, 45–47, 51, 89, 90, 98, 102, 148, 167

175 Sense of wonder, 3, 52, 97, 114 Significance, 8, 22–24, 36, 46, 47, 106, 141 Singapore, 13, 31, 50, 51 Sketches, 104, 140, 157 Skills, vi, 4, 6, 9, 10, 19, 24–26, 30, 35, 41–43, 57, 83, 84, 90, 93, 96–98, 100, 102–111, 114, 117, 118, 121, 124, 125, 127, 130, 134–137, 139, 140, 146–148, 155, 157, 159, 164–168 Social constructivist learning theory, 96 Social sciences, vi, 2, 3, 5, 10, 16, 19–21, 24–26, 81, 113, 120, 153, 155, 158 Social skills, 42, 43, 121 Society, 2–5, 9, 13, 16, 18, 21–23, 25, 30, 42, 46–51, 53, 55, 56, 58, 114, 119, 122, 127, 147, 148, 154, 157, 158, 164, 167 Space, 1–3, 5, 7, 20, 21, 23, 30, 34, 38, 39, 43, 48, 53, 64, 97, 118, 134, 137, 139–141, 152, 155, 157, 166, 167 Spatial activities, 137 Spatial behaviour competencies, 2 Spatial concepts, 134, 136–139 Spatial distributions, 3, 23, 81, 116 Spatial gameplay, 137 Spatial games, 137 Spatial language, 136–140 Spatial orientation patterns, 166 Spatial perceptions, 135, 152, 166 Spatial relationships, 3, 5, 81, 135 Spatial representations, 134, 136, 139, 140, 142 Spatial skills, 134–140, 166 Spatial thinking, 93, 134–142, 166 Spatial visualisation, 135, 140 Stimulus question, 99, 103, 106 Student as an agent of change, 8 Student-generated questions, 3–4, 14, 81–91, 165 Student-generated question typology, 3, 81–91, 103 Student metacognitive questions, 103 Students, vi, 3–9, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 30, 31, 33, 34, 41–43, 46, 49, 52–54, 56–59, 65, 67, 69–71, 75–77, 81–91, 93, 95–111, 113–130, 134, 137, 139–142, 146, 149, 150, 153, 156–158, 165, 167 Studies of Society and Environment (SOSE), 24 Sustainability, v, 4, 5, 13, 22, 23, 25, 30, 36, 40–43, 97, 114, 117, 121, 127, 152, 157, 167 Sustainable futures, v, 19, 23, 25, 29–43, 167

Index

176 Symbols, 88, 100, 104–106, 108–110, 124, 125 Synthesis, vi, 2, 93 Synthetic models, 64 Systems approach, 18, 19 T Taxonomy of spatial thinking, 141, 142 Teacher in charge, 122, 123 Teaching, v, vi, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24–26, 31, 34, 40, 41, 46, 47, 50–56, 58, 59, 69, 71, 77, 86, 90, 93–103, 109, 110, 113, 118–120, 123–125, 128, 130, 134, 140, 141, 146, 148, 149, 151–156, 158, 159, 164, 165, 167, 168 Technologies, 20, 23, 25, 42, 48, 96, 118, 127, 134, 136, 146, 147, 150, 154, 158, 159, 164 Textbooks, 41, 84, 142 Thinking skills, 9, 55, 84, 91, 137, 140, 141, 165 Three-dimensional thinking, 136 Tools, 3, 5, 6, 21, 81, 82, 91, 110, 114, 118, 120, 127, 140–142, 146, 149, 154, 157–159, 164 Transcultural, 47–49, 53–59, 167 Transculturalism, 47–49, 57 Transformative subject, 10 21st Century skills, vi, 6, 9, 10, 42, 139, 159, 164 Typology of questions, 83, 89, 91

U Understanding, vi, 1–10, 13, 16, 17, 19, 22, 24–26, 30, 31, 33, 36, 39, 41, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 54, 57, 59, 62, 63, 68, 69, 81, 82, 84, 86, 87, 89–91, 93, 95–97, 100, 105, 109–111, 114, 115, 119, 124, 125, 134, 136, 137, 140, 142, 146, 154, 158, 159, 164, 165, 167, 168 UNESCO Sustainability Development Goals, v V Values, vi, 4–7, 10, 17, 22, 23, 30, 36, 41, 42, 55, 114, 119–121, 134, 136–139, 148, 149, 153, 155, 159, 164, 168 Victorian curriculum, 25, 51, 52, 55, 58 Virtual reality, 115, 127 Visualise, 103, 104, 135, 140 Vocabulary development, 107, 121 W Ways of thinking, 8, 20, 110, 158, 166 Wearable devices, 146 Wirudjuri, 124 Y Youth, vi, 7, 22, 167