I am totally behind Noel Jenkins on this.
School geography all too frequently forgets the importance of the personal/individual scale. Too often 'Local' is the smallest scale that can be justified and Standish makes a case that forgets the "I, me and my" all over again. In the United States National Geography Standards (currently being revised) guidance is that in grade 1 (age 6-7) children are supposed to learn 'personal to world' geographies, but then in a simplistic way grade 2-3 focuses on 'local and state', 4-5 on 'state and world', 6-8 'U.S. and world' and finally in grades 9-12 (aged 14-18) just world. When you reach the age of 8 your experience, reflexivity and interest do not weaken... and they don't when you are 80 either.
While having a view of the wider world is vital, I strongly believe that coming into contact with the personal, 'everyday', meaningful, relevant and practical is vital for geography to be successful. There is a connection for me here on what Noel has said about the lack of connection between teachers and academics. In order to learn about some of the most interesting geographies children are forced to wait until they reach A or degree level. Many of the interesting, relevant and meaningful cultural geographies that are talked about on a regular basis in this forum need to find their way far more quickly into schools.
An additional point I would like to make about this general trend is a lack of creativity. This is true within the approach and content of what is being suggested by both Standish and the Geographical Association.. but also true of what they propose to dish out the young people. Standish manages to avoid using the words creative or create in the whole of his document while the GA uses the words twice and one of those times in reference to the creation of glaciers. Creativity, innovation and educational risk taking can be empowering and enjoyable for individuals and are certainly vital for our future.
Perhaps a lack of creative and personal geographies in the school curriculum is responsible for our generally weak publicly known geographies... why has geography failed why science and history have succeeded in popular books, TV and apparently the Conservative Party...
My final point for now is about the general attitude of Gove and many of his friends to education. It makes me very angry when people start talking about teaching today's children Latin. This is one of the greatest single pieces of evidence to show the lack of understanding of what young people and society as a whole need today. With the exception of a small elite the argument for bringing Latin into schools is extremely weak. There are other ways to 'train and exercise brains' in more useful and relevant ways. While one or two rioters in London may have called "carpe diem" I very much doubt it.. Very much linked to geographical understanding, if they are serious about language surely Spanish, Mandarin, Polish, Welsh or Arabic would be more useful on both a personal and national scale.
Daniel Raven-Ellison
http://www.geographycollective.co.uk
http://thegeographycollective.wordpress.com/the-geography-camp/
|