Geographical Futures

  1. I’d like to start with the front page of Monday’s Guardian. I had completed my presentation – honest – but like all good geographers there is always a way to get something topical into a presentation. First three = of interest but tangential to our subject. Second three = issues that we would immediately recognise as our territory and/or issues that we have something to say about. Without geography you cannot make sense of these issues. I realise that I’m preaching to the converted but I will start this presentation where I will end it – geography has to have a future or our children and young people, and society as a whole, will be lacking in fundamental knowledge, understanding, skills and opportunities.
  1. I chose Geographical Futures as the theme of my Presidential year for a number of reasons. Foremost in my mind was the future of the Geographical Association itself. The last 6 years have seen a decline in membership from a peak of just over 10,000 (2001) to its current level of approximately 6,500. This is a challenge for an organisation that is essentially a membership organisation – you join the GA by subscribing to one or more of its journals. At the same time there has been a significant growth in ‘third stream’ activities – curriculum and continuing professional development (CPD) projects – such that income from these activities, including the Action Plan for Geography, in 2006-07 is £298,000 compared with an estimated membership income of £355,000. This figure excludes the Action Plan for Geography, a two-year, £2 million, programme funded by the DfES ‘To provide everyone – opinion formers, policy makers, schools, parents and pupils – with a clear vision of geography as a relevant and powerful 21st century subject; and to equip teachers with the professional skills and support they need so that pupils enjoy and succeed in geography.’ This programme is delivered by the GA and the RGS/IBG in partnership and includes a joint membership proposal. What do we want the Geographical Association to look like in 3, 5 or 10 years time?
  1. The future of the Geographical Association is, of course, integrally related to the future of geography in the school curriculum and in higher education. We have become so used to education reforms that there is a danger of them slipping by unnoticed but the current changes have far reaching consequences for how – and possibly if - our subject is taught. Primary schools are being encouraged to ‘free up’ the curriculum, which could be good or bad news for geography depending on the skill and inclination of the teacher. There is a revised Key Stage 3 Programme of Study, revised GCSE and A-level subject criteria and the introduction of the 14 ‘diploma lines’ between September 2008 and September 2010. (Designed as an alternative to traditional GCSEs and A levels, Diplomas are multi-component qualifications themed around an industry sector. They will combine vocational or applied content with rigorous theoretical learning, set in the context of a particular industry, known as a ‘line of learning’. Young people undertaking the Diploma curriculum will be guaranteed to learn practical, functional skills in English, mathematics and ICT, as well as concentrating on the personal, learning and thinking skills so highly prized by employers and higher education. Diplomas will be available at three levels, pre-GCSE, GCSE and A-level.)
  1. In the universities there are positive indicators. About 34,000 people are studying geography in UK universities. The number of people applying to geography undergraduate courses at UK universities and colleges as of 15th January 2007 had increased by 5.5% for physical geography and environmental sciences and by 3.1% for human geography according to latest statistics from UCAS compared with 2006. The last the Research Assessment Exercise, 2001 found geographical research in universities thriving: over 1,229 staff working at the highest level of Geographical research (officially called Category A/A* staff). The panel overseeing Geography noted “extensive evidence of the vitality of the discipline” (Report of the Geography Panel, 2001 RAE).[i]
  1. In Initial Teacher Training (ITT) there are some significant concerns.[ii] The amount of geography training provided in primary courses has become less and less in recent years. On a PGCE course about 10 hours of geography training is often the norm. When the current Qualifying to Teach regulations were introduced, primary trainees were required to be trained in either geography or history. At secondary, there is a predicted reduction of 399 training places from 03/04 to 07/08. There has been a reduction in tutor employment and a closure of courses. What do we want geography in education to look like in 3, 5 or 10 years time?
  1. And then there is geography itself. We are here because we share a passion for our subject. I do not have to convince you that geography is relevant, stimulating and interesting. I also accept that academic disciplines will debate – need to debate – their core purpose, so that the answer to the question ‘What is geography?’ will never be uncontested. David Lambert addresses this question in his article ‘Can we – should we – ‘brand’ school geography?’[iii] on the Geography Teaching Today website and comments that ‘The issues discussed here have challenged many a fine curriculum developer in the past.’ So, I will not endeavour to sort this one in the next 60 seconds. However, I think we have been singularly bad at identifying a highest common factor and even worse at communicating this to the world at large. Geography is people, places, environments and spatial interrelationships – job defined, now let’s get on with the interesting stuff? What do we want geography to be in 3, 5 or 10 years time?
  1. My final reason for choosing Geographical Futures reflects a sense of frustration that so much of the last 15 years, since geography made the final cut of the original National Curriculum, has been spent defending geography and at best halting the rate of erosion. We need a different strategy. New technologies are available to us – instead of groynes we have GIS, instead of rock armour we have new areas of study, instead of sea walls we have sustainable development and citizenship. What future do we want to make for geography?
  1. What goes around comes around? I did not know when I chose my theme that Rex Walford’s 1984 presidential address was entitled ‘Geography and the Future’[iv]. In fact, when Rex became President of the GA on 1st September 1983 I was on a train from Bombay to Delhi, doing (to misquote the Bishop of Southwark) what geographers do – travelling the world. Rex notes that geography seems to be poorly represented in the corridors of power and identifies three challenges for those concerned with geographical education: the need to respond to curricular initiatives originating from outside geography; the need to improve geography’s public image; and the need to integrate the community of geography teachers and academics for more effective action. How have we done?
  1. I think we have done well at gaining access to the corridors of power, although constant vigilance and effort is required. Patrick Bailey, as President in 1985-86, led the charge with ‘A Case for Geography’, supported by Elspeth Fyfe, Tony Binns and a roll call of the ablest lieutenants. We ‘hung on in there’ during some difficult times in the 1990s, fielding teams of volunteers at meetings such as the Primary and Secondary Umbrella Groups, responding to every consultation and never passing up an invite from a government quango. The real success has come with the professionalisation of the association and in particular the appointment of David Lambert as Chief Executive, who has given outstanding leadership to the GA and who has secured – not alone but with tireless energy and considerable skill – the GA a place at the table of subject associations to be taken seriously by the DfES. David’s appointment, with Rita Gardener, as special adviser to Lord Adonis, Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Schools, is testimony to that success.
  1. I think we could do better at responding to curricular initiatives originating from outside geography. Successes have included the work of the Geography Schools and Industry Project, the GNVQ Working Party and the ongoing work of the Environmental and Sustainable Development Working Group and the recently formed Citizenship Working Group. The question ‘Should we try to influence?’ has by and large been replaced by ‘How will we influence?’ and many geography departments play a lead role in delivering vocational education. However, it is not always easy to get involved. These courses are not conceived as geography and the outcomes are not necessarily geographical. We can see the opportunities but geography often improves the course at the margin, in the hands of a specialist. We must continue to respond – no opportunity must be missed - but I think we must be realistic about what we can achieve.
  1. The need to improve geography’s public image is one area where I think we have, with a few notable exceptions, failed. Geography teachers are still the butt of too many jokes and it does matter! The majority of geography teachers do not have beards and wear corduroy jackets and those that do should be able to do so without feeling persecuted. It doesn’t have to be like this. The public image of a geographer could be of a leading edge scientist, using a wide range of high-tech equipment to investigate relevant issues and interesting phenomena; someone who is confident, enthusiastic, knowledgeable and involved. That we can appeal is superbly illustrated by the success of the ‘G’ Team, who won the competition to guest edit the Today programme on Radio 4 on New Year’s Day 2007. David Lambert, Dan Raven-Ellison and 14 year old Hannah Bosher put together a programme that was widely admired, although, sadly, 7.00 am on New Year’s Day is not peak listening time. The involvement of Michael Palin with the Action Plan for Geography is another example of the geographical community successfully working with the media.
  1. I am certain that improving geography’s public image is a priority and that – despite past failures – it can be done. Rex Walford wished ‘that we (GA, RGS, IBG) could find the collective will to depute at least one selected officer of the national organisations to systematically and exhaustively monitor (such) comments’. I think we need to go further than this, and I am delighted to say that developing and implementing a press and public relations policy has been included in the job description of the new post of programme director that we are creating to support the Chief Executive with the GA’s expanding portfolio of projects.
  1. In relation to integrating the community of geography teachers and academics for more effective action my own feeling is that we have gone backwards before we have started to move in the right direction again. Change in the universities has been a big factor here. The Research Assessment Exercise has meant that there is little credit to be gained from writing for the school’s audience, or from being involved with examination design and delivery. As ever, there are notable exceptions – I thank the lecturers who travel the country to speak at GA branches and I think of the initiatives of individuals such as Mike and Sheila Bradford; the Bradford Awards, worth £600 to the winner, to encourage and reward innovation in secondary school geography at department level, with the ultimate goal of encouraging students to continue to study geography beyond the 'compulsory years'. However, much more needs to be done and I see the Action Plan for Geography’s Ambassador’s strand as the first stage in a vital long-term development.
  1. Of course, Rex Walford was writing before GCSEs, National Curriculum levels, the National Strategies et al but without reprising the full gamut of educational changes in the last 24 years I do need to mention what I consider to be the most profound: Every Child Matters. The Education Act of 2004 was the DfES’s response to the death of Victoria Climbié, the young girl who was horrifically abused and tortured, and eventually killed by her great aunt and the man with whom they lived. Every Child Matters: Change for Children was published in November 2004, a new approach to the well being of children and young people from birth to age 19. Providers of Children’s Services, including education, must be measured against the same five outcomes: being healthy, staying safe, enjoying and achieving, taking part and securing economic well being. To give an example, Ofsted inspections report against the five outcomes and the GA has already provided advice to support geography subject leaders record achievement on the school’s self-evaluation form against these headings.
  1. Central to this new approach is giving Children and young people far more say about issues that affect them as individuals and collectively. This is a significant opportunity for geography. With, once again, some notable exceptions, I think we have been very poor at this. Some of my evidence is anecdotal, from talking to children and young people when I have been inspecting classrooms. Some of my evidence is there for anyone to read – ‘what children and young people think’ is missing from almost every analysis of what, how and when geography should be taught. Frustratingly, there are schools and colleges who are good at listening but do not take action on what they have heard. I am not advocating that we should abandon 2,000 years of the subject’s development because 9Y do not like learning about coastal scenery but unless we involve children and young people in the dialogue I genuinely believe that geography as a school – and probably university – subject will wither on the vine. The most common concerns I hear are ‘We enjoy learning about other countries but we don’t do them for GCSE’ and ‘We’ve done this before’. And still, as geography educators, we don’t do anything about it – children drop geography at the end of Year 9 and we carry on repeating rivers until the levee breaks.
  1. Paul Weeden explores this issue in his article in Geography, ‘Students’ Perceptions of Geography: Decision making at age 14’[v]. Paul concludes that the decline in numbers at GCSE (29.4% between 1996 and 2006) appears due to a complex interaction between individual students’ perceptions of geography, the quality of teaching and learning in geography departments, and whole-school option choice systems. Weeden draws on a range of studies that support my anecdotal evidence: the most common interesting topics are finding out about the world, studying places and other countries, big environmental issues and events and locational and factual knowledge about places. One study reported that KS4 students enjoyed learning new aspects of subject content in preference to revisiting a previously studied topic in more depth. Geography is successful in competing with other subjects when it is relevant, topical, up-to-date, reflects the cutting edge of geography, and is fun and interesting.
  1. You will not be surprised to know that I am delighted that a strand of the Action Plan for Geography is Young People’s Geographies. There are eight schools involved in the project from different parts of the country. At three one day conferences students will meet and talk about how the geography curriculum can be organised and planned in an innovative, exciting and worthwhile way. The outcome will be a set of curriculum units delivered in the students’ schools.
  1. One of the most enjoyable and influential projects that I have been involved with was GeoVisions[vi]. This project came out of Tide~DEC (Teachers in Development Education DEC Birmingham), led by Scott Sinclair, Tide~DEC’s Director, with the strap line ‘Create the future – don’t let it just happen’. GeoVisions provided a forum to debate, raise issues, research and make proposals about the future of school geography. The GA adopted GeoVisions under Di Swift’s leadership and over a period of two years it inspired a range of workshops and publications, including the GA’s April 2002 Position Statement on geography[vii], and it initiated the GA’s involvement with ‘third stream’ activities. GeoVisions introduced me to possible, probable and preferred futures and, I now realise, to my presidential theme.
  1. To create the future of geography rather than just let it happen, we need a strategy for change. In ‘Success and Sustainability: Developing the strategically focused school’ the authors argue that poor strategies often emerge because of lack of clarification of core purpose, values and vision. It is essential that the GA – and geography – avoid the same pit falls. The GA’s core purpose is clearly defined in its mission statement, ‘furthering the learning and teaching of geography’. Our values are more clearly defined than they have ever been before, with the recent publication of the GA’s inclusion policy, which sits alongside our policy on the environment and ethical investment. And I have started a debate at Governing Body, that will now go to the membership, on our vision: what factors do we need to take into account in renewing our vision, what do we want the GA to be like in 10 years time and what do we need to do to get there?
  1. What have the Governing Body come up with so far? In our first discussion we identified a wide range of factors that need to be taken into account in forming our vision:
  2. policy environment
  3. CPD environment
  4. demography
  5. what will learning be like in ten years time?
  6. the global context
  7. membership
  8. relationship with the wider geographical and subject community
  9. role of GA
  10. children and young people
  1. In our second discussion we listed, in groups, our top ten characteristics for what the GA should be like in 10 years time. Here is a selection of characteristics where there was significant agreement:
  2. every school a member
  3. a diverse organisation, open and welcoming
  4. young people actively participating
  5. vibrant branches and committees, with a strong regional network
  6. a larger international / global presence
  7. independent and outward looking
  8. embracing partnerships with complementary organisations
  9. HQ premises a centre of excellence – as a place to work, meet and learn
  10. an advocate for geography, in the curriculum and in the public domain
  11. catering for all levels of engagement from the occasional website visitor to the geography activist
  1. Geography also needs clarity of core purpose, values and vision. The revised Key Stage 3 Programme of Study gives us a statement that I would hope few would disagree with, even it if it is not quite how you would have said it, thus making it an ideal highest common factor: ‘The study of geography stimulates an interest in, and a sense of wonder about, places and helps make sense of a complex and dynamically changing world. It explains how places and landscapes are formed, how people and environment interact, and how a diverse range of economies and societies are interconnected’[viii]. Clarity of values does not mean that we all have to believe the same thing – debate is essential to the vitality of a discipline – but I think it does mean that we have to be more in agreement about what we mean by key geographical concepts, knowledge, understanding and skills. Essential to a shared vision is an acceptance of the reality of the educational landscape in the early 21st Century. Beaches do not develop at headlands; they form in the centre of bays. Sand dunes can be encouraged with stabilising plants. We must locate geography in the right place in the landscape and provide the appropriate support.
  1. The GA, through its journals, has already started the discussion. Margaret Roberts, in Teaching Geography[ix], identifies three questions that we must consider if we are to reshape and revitalise school geography: What should be in the geography curriculum and why? How should students learn geography? How can the teaching and learning of geography be improved? Fran Martin in her Primary Geographer article ‘Everyday geography’[x] argues for a re-conceptualisation of geography in a way that is appropriate for the primary context, i.e. a geography that grows out of the everyday lives of teachers and children. The knowledge that teachers and pupils bring with them from their daily experiences connects with the knowledge and ways of understanding the world that geographers have developed over many years. Everyday experiences become a starting point for an investigation of the wider world. This view very much accords with my experience of advising primary school teachers over a ten-year period most of whom ‘dropped’ geography at the end of Year 9.
  1. So, what do we need to do to make the future, rather than have it made for us? My personal view is that we must understand and accept the reality of the education system that we are part of. We must identify where we can make a difference and put our energies there. The biggest difference will be made in the classroom, so the more we can do to support teachers – many of whom are not specialist geographers – teach relevant and interesting lessons, the better. We must follow the Action Plan for Geography with a Strategy for Change. We must take co-ordinated and concerted action to improve geography’s public image. And above all we must involve children and young people in the development of geography in our schools and universities. If every child matters – and they do – then children deserve a geographical education that will last a lifetime. A confident geographical community that is clear about its core purpose, values and vision and that pulls together with energy and commitment can, and will, succeed.

[i] information provided by Jonathan Bxxxxx, RGS/IBG, April 2007