Posted on 11/28/2004 6:05:50 AM PST by flitton
David Bell, the Chief Inspector for Schools, thinks he has worked out why the number of pupils taking GCSE geography has fallen by a third in the past eight years: it's all because school geography courses fill pupils with too many facts and aren't "relevant" enough.
"We need to engage pupils more purposely," he says. "Water shortages, famine, migrations of people, disputes over oil, globalisation and debt are all major issues with which our world is grappling and this is the geography of today."
I have an alternative explanation for the drop in pupils studying geography: maybe it is just that pupils can't find their way to the classroom. It is navigation and map-reading that are lacking in school geography these days, not lessons on famine and debt. Contrary to Mr Bell's assertion, pupils have long stopped learning "irrelevant" details such as where Patagonia is and what are the main exports of Indonesia. I don't know what more Mr Bell wants when geography teachers have already been turned into propagandists for the anti-globalisation movement.
The national curriculum for geography these days reads like a Greenpeace pamphlet. Take Unit 18 of Key Stage 3, entitled "the global fashion industry", which is designed to make 13-year-olds feel guilty about their Nike trainers. "Ask pupils to compare the difference in hourly rates of pay between selected countries for the production of clothing/footwear," it demands. The pupils must then use the information to write an article for a newspaper entitled "Who's the fashion victim?"
This loaded exercise is then followed by another: the children are asked to "design a flyer to publicise the issue of fair trading". There is no room for discussion as to whether the outsourcing of jobs to the Third World might actually be enriching those countries, no attempt to help children understand that Third World factory workers sewing trainers for $5 a day are extremely well-off compared with alternative forms of local employment. What school geography teaches children about globalisation is pure Left-wing dogma.
An NOP survey in 2002 claimed that 13 per cent of eight-to-16-year olds cannot locate Britain on a map of Europe and 53 per cent cannot place London on a map of the British Isles. It is little wonder, when primary school "geography" lessons consist of exercises such as forcing children to write to local opticians to persuade them to join a contact lens recycling scheme. A hundred years ago, 11-year-olds were expected to be able to locate obscure towns in the colonies and explain how they earned their keep. Now, they have been reduced to acting as bully boys for the Government's environmental policy.
When I took a geography degree at Cambridge in 1989 I could see the way the subject was going. Lecturers sneered at old-fashioned "capes and bays" geography - where you were expected to know where places are - and ran courses on dialectical materialism instead. Even the Royal Geographical Society, the alma mater of Shackleton and Scott, has been seized by the anti-globalisation movement. This year it gave its coveted Victoria Medal to Michael Watts, a Californian Marxist who dismisses traditional geography as "an imperialist discipline".
Last week, the Chief Inspector for Schools praised a new version of the GCSE geography exam that has even less factual content than the existing exam, and allows pupils the chance to express their views on subjects. I think they already are expressing their views, by choosing subjects other than geography, where they will have a chance to learn something, rather than being fed the prejudices of louts who lob bricks through the windows of McDonald's.
He isn't talking about GEOGRAPHY, he is talking politics, sociology, etc.
Coming soon to a classroom near you!
What? It's already here, you say?
Oh. Never mind.
The first thing that jumped to my mind was, 'How far does five bucks a day go there?'. There are places in the world where that isn't bad money.
That's one reason why Americans move offshore- you can take a half-assed savings that doesn't go very far here and live pretty well on it someplace else.
I guess that you don't have to know anything about economics to become a Professor these days.
Nah. Keep teaching these subjects as dry abstractions, non-judgementally, with all cultures equal and your own the worst of the lot. Wouldn't want to offend anyone with the truth.
As for the level of interest in these subjects, well, I'm willing to bet that outside factors will get the kids interested sooner or later.
(steely)
Trouble is that is what passes for geography these days. When I was at school it was facts first conclusions later.
Geography has been abandoned by the INS, transnational criminals and terrorists.
Geography should be replaced with robust world history instruction. Geography is inherently political and provides a perfect forum for "social engineering" class.
This is sooo typical. Geography gets hijacked by Marxists. No more "capes and bays" and instead they push a political agenda. Interest diminishes. Student population drops. Obviously, there is a problem ... the solution? Less "capes and bays" and an increased push of the ol' Marxist agenda. Yeah, that'll help.
So, I guess it would also be okay for a student to say that 2x3 isn't really 6, it is actually about 5.4 ..... maybe even something like 6.3; It's a very subjective thing. Does this sound like someone else that we have come to know in recent past?
I studied the Hard Science of Geography, (Remote Sensing, Statistical Geocoding and Mapping, Cartography, etc..). My University had the good sense to SEPERATE Geography and ENVIROMENTALISM into completely different departments. Many places do not. Just like some Colleges teach education,ethics and philosophy radically, it does not mean the entire discipline is like that. I know from experience that the places that do, are not well respected in the field.
SIGH ... no wonder the kids in my church can't tell me where Holland is, but they can spout socialist-nonsense about the inequalities of world economics. I can remember when one of the objectives of geography was to be able to name the continents, the nations on those continents, the capitals, the major sea-ports, bays, seas, and oceans ... etc. When one understands WHERE on the planet people live, their various histories begin to make some sense. But ... heaven forbid that we actually teach kids something that will help them to understand that what they're getting from the commies in school is nonsense!!!!!
Sorry fellows but I am an American first guy. Outsourcing jobs is hammering the American blue collar worker. I really don't care if the wages paid in another country are considered to be a good wage. Keep the jobs in America for Americans.
I may be a dreamer but I want to see enough jobs with decent wages so that mothers who want to stay home and raise kids can, while dad earns a living.
The price we pay for low price, made in China goods is a hell of a price to pay. We are building a economic dynamo in a communist country to compete with us. Our corporations are ensuring a vibrant Chinese military to deal with as its national leaders seek expansion throughout the world.
That reminds me of Mark Twain's remark:
War is just God's way of teaching geography to Americans.
Why does the author refer to Marxism as "Anti-globalization"? It seems to me that the Marxists are the ones pushing for a one-world government. Rather than anti-globalists, they seem to be "globalists" in the extreme.
Wow. An excellent article that very succinctly describes the downfall of the education system.
Step one should still be to teach chidren to locate the nations of the world on a map. Step two should be to know their capitals.
The other stuff can come after that. Not enough basics in todays curriculum, it seems.
Yeah, that's right. Geography is now irrelevant. Let's get some good ol' socialist politics in there for the kiddies.
Because the left is not necessarily home to clear thinking. The theory goes, presumably, globalisation is business bad globalisation of government good. Ther are many who need poor countries as a constituency for their failed ideas.
Not enough time in the day to teach basics and brainwashing too. Since basics are old hat, let the indoctrination begin! The parents won't complain, and if they do, just laugh and tell them they've stepped out of the "mainstream".
There are two great Geography learning/motivating tools available on the internet. One is a subscription service from Keyhole.com. A free two week trial is available at: http://www.keyhole.com/body.php?h=products&t=keyhole2LT
The other is totally free from NASA and is called World Wind. http://learn.arc.nasa.gov/worldwind/ However, it is a 253+ MB download!
Warning! Both of these are extremely addictive, especially the Keyhole low angle "flyovers"! In many areas of the US and some foreign cities you will be able to find your house, and often tell if the car was in the driveway when the aerial photo was taken.
Same here, and Geography was my college major.
And it will continue. The problem is not with American corporations. The problem is with government. The EPA, OSHA, minimum wage laws, ridiculous liability costs, and oppressive taxes and the cost of compliance with the code is why companies do business overseas. Make no mistake about it, if companies were allowed to thrive in a free market, outsourcing manufacturing would not be a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.