Changing Horizons in Geography Education - HERODOT Network ...

of the world, but multiple maps of meaning (Jackson, 1989). Post-modern approacheshave emphasised different geographies, different viewpoints, and different representationsof the world and how place identity is constructed through relationshipswith other places (Massey, 2002).Just as the discourses of academic geography change the map of the studiedworld, so do the discourses of the educational world. Before the introduction of theGeography National Curriculum (GNC) in 1991 the dominant approach to syllabusconstruction was through thematic studies, influenced variably by the quantitativerevolution and by radical geography’s concerns with issues. A minority of schools stillinfluenced by a regional approach studied the world through a curriculum structuredby continents and countries (Roberts, 1998). As teachers could choose what theytaught, the curriculum worlds constructed through these frameworks varied.Concern about the under-emphasis of place studies in schools (Walford 2000,Rawling, 2001) influenced the first GNC (DES, 1991) with the result that it included,in addition to the study of themes, the compulsory study of specified places: thehome region; one of France, Germany, Italy and Spain; one of twelve named LessEconomically Developed Countries (LEDCs), and one of USA, Japan and USSR. Theemphasis was on descriptive studies. The two revisions of the GNC in 1995 (DFE,1995) and 2000 (DfEE, 1999) still included the study of place, but countries wereno longer specified and only two countries had to be studied. Instead of emphasison description there was emphasis on studying at a range of scales within regionaland global contexts and independence (DFE, 1995) and on the distinctive characterof places, the causes and consequences of regional differences, change and issuesof topical significance (DfEE, 1999).MethodologyI used both quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the shape of the worldcreated by the choice of countries and case studies. I sent a questionnaire survey to122 schools in an attempt to produce some generalisations about which countries werestudied and why. The response rate was 69%. I used qualitative methods to examinethe particular worlds created in individual schools through choice of countries andcase studies and to explore the thinking behind the choices made. I interviewed headsof geography in six schools, focusing on the whole curriculum in three schools andon Europe in three different schools.Survey findingsThe current GNC in the UK requires pupils to study any ‘two countries in significantlydifferent states of economic development’. Four countries dominated thechoices. Italy and Japan dominated the MEDCs chosen, with 72% of schoolschoosing one or both of these countries. 75% of schools chose either Brazil orKenya.An open question on why particular countries were studied produced a variety ofresponses. A large majority (90%) explained their choices in terms of resources, somestating simply that they were ‘in the texts we purchased’, others indicating a more59