A futures time perspective in geography in the Netherlands
Transcript A futures time perspective in geography in the Netherlands
A futures time perspective in
geography education in the
Tine Béneker, Hans Palings, Iris Pauw
GTE Winchester 25 January 2014
Q: compare UK?
Q: comments, ideas, priorities?
Futures dimension in GE
David Hicks (2001, 2002, 2006, 2012):
‘If all education is for the future where is the future explored in
David Lambert (2011, p 138; 2010, p 65):
Geography in education (in a capability approach) evokes a subject
that can contribute to young people’s:
deep descriptive ‘world knowledge’
theoretically informed relational understanding of people and places in the
propensity and disposition to think about alternative social,
economic and environmental futures.
Futures perspectives in education: only
limited progress (England, Australia…)
Hicks (2012), Bateman (2004), Slaughter (2008)
(Hierarchical) school and education systems: not
concerned (with human and social needs)
Lack of visible urgency: issues are ‘elsewhere’ and ‘later’
Lack of confidence / willingness (teachers)…and still
missing experience and professional development
I To what extent and in what ways can we recognize a
futures time perspective (FTP) in the curriculum,
textbooks and exams?
II How can we understand this result in the context of
a. the educational system and policies in the
b. the characteristics of the subject (geographic
Looking at the curriculum
Interpretation by users
Curriculum in action,
actual teaching process
Kuiper & Nieveen (2012), Balancing curriculum freedom and regulation in the Netherlands
Q1: results for vocational education (14-16)
Vision for a new national
Implementation in 2013
‘Views on a changing
Law + elaborations
Key items: Finding
for problems and
‘The case of the
- Probable developments
Q1: results for vocational education
Presence of futures
Explicit in two (of eight)
- sources of energy
- water (in relation to
Q1: results for university preparatory
education (15-18) (a-levels)
Scheme for a new national
Implementation in 2007
‘Regions in perspective’
-Climate change curriculum
-Water issues NL
Presence of futures
time perspective in
- in subject
- debate issues
- few future
-15 % of text
- 21% of assignments
pledge for more
-refer to thinking in - fixed, probable
- fore & back casting - only 18 of 433
intended impulse - concept of
for open, creative, sustainability
- policy evaluation
Q1: results for upper secondary school
- future as décor
- negative connotation
‘edge of disaster’
Examples from the issues of climate change
The student can critically review current discussion on climate change, involving
(a.o.) the role of societal and natural factors in future climate change, on short term
as well as long term.
The student can review climate policy focused on a solution on macro regional
Formulating a future expectation (forecasting) is of no use if you’re not willing to
draw conclusions from it for the present (backcasting)
In the paragraph ‘the climate in the future’;
Ouch, that was a lot of trouble! It is just like geography, sometimes it is complicated
and seems like a problem, but it actually is a tremendous fascinating challenge.
What will this glacier look like in 10 years time?
Fill in the blanks: formulating a future expectation (……………) is of no use
if you’re not willing to draw conclusions from it for the present (…………..)
How do you think you should deal with the certainty of climate change, but
the uncertainty of causes, extent and the enormous risks?
What scenario and policy do you favor? Who would be your biggest opponent?
Research question 2:
Interpreting the results
Factors influencing the innovation process
(Bednarz, 2003; Nine years on)
1. Authority (law, leadership)
2. Power (norm, test)
3. Prescriptiveness (‘recipe’)
4. Consistency (within teachers context)
Focus group (GE community)
Authority (law, leadership)
No support (national educational policy, geography community)
Power (norm, test)
Strong output testing. Focus on economic performance.
Lack of clarity on the pedagogy, methods
Consistency (within teachers context)
Ambivalance! Teacher’s question: ‘is this geography’s (core) business?”
Conclusion & comparison
FTP in GE in the UK?
From our perspective more attention for a futures dimension in British
Geography Education (at least in literature on function and form:
DavidHicks, Alun Morgan, Margaret Roberts (a.o.))
Are our ‘outcomes’ different from UK practices? What is comparable and
what is different?
What is the state of the art in the UK at present?
a. Is a FTP in GE recognized by teacher educators and teachers?
b. Do ‘they’ use / are they aware of related pedagogies?
c. Is FTP part of Geography Curriculum (A-levels?)? Is it used in final
d. What is the lesson to be learnt for the Netherlands from the UK
experience so far?
Your ideas on our ‘beautiful’ struggle?
Starting point: Role of the teacher crucial for any innovation…
A.Teachers / teacher students and teacher educators:
*How do teachers/teacher students/teacher educators think of FTP in GE?
*How does it relate to their vision on GE and their own views of the future?
*What practices of FTP can we find in classrooms / courses?
B.Pedagogies for FTP in GE (attained curriculum):
*What knowledge (in geography content and pedagogical) do we need for
(good) practice in FTP in GE?
*How do students experience FTP in GE and what are the learning outcomes
(attained, experiential and learned curriculum)?
Q: Are this important questions? Priorities? Is there already such research?
Dutch education system
Primary education (4-12)
Lower secondary education (12-15)
Geography = mandatory