Should we only teach about real people and real places?
This article offers a discussion of teaching about real people and places. Examples of not-real people and places in the influential publication 'Thinking Through Geography' (Leat, 2001) are critically discussed, and an argument is made against the teaching of geography through not-real pe...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Geographical Association
2017
|
| _version_ | 1797052834449981440 |
|---|---|
| author | Puttick, S |
| author_facet | Puttick, S |
| author_sort | Puttick, S |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | This article offers a discussion of teaching about real people and places. Examples of not-real people and places in the influential publication 'Thinking Through Geography' (Leat, 2001) are critically discussed, and an argument is made against the teaching of geography through not-real people and places. The examples from 'Thinking Through Geography' are suggested to: be necessarily limited in a way that sources about real people and places are not; include a problematic hidden curriculum; and offer a type of representation that positions imaginary places as if they were real. What 'the real' means is explored, and it is argued that, while teaching about not-real people and places is potentially highly problematic, simply teaching about 'the real' is impossible. A notion of 'useful fictions' is offered, and suggestions are made for further engagement with representation and abstraction in school geography. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T18:36:14Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:0b535712-abec-4ee1-a1d9-81c14d984c5e |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T18:36:14Z |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | Geographical Association |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:0b535712-abec-4ee1-a1d9-81c14d984c5e2022-03-26T09:28:47ZShould we only teach about real people and real places?Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:0b535712-abec-4ee1-a1d9-81c14d984c5eEnglishSymplectic ElementsGeographical Association2017Puttick, SThis article offers a discussion of teaching about real people and places. Examples of not-real people and places in the influential publication 'Thinking Through Geography' (Leat, 2001) are critically discussed, and an argument is made against the teaching of geography through not-real people and places. The examples from 'Thinking Through Geography' are suggested to: be necessarily limited in a way that sources about real people and places are not; include a problematic hidden curriculum; and offer a type of representation that positions imaginary places as if they were real. What 'the real' means is explored, and it is argued that, while teaching about not-real people and places is potentially highly problematic, simply teaching about 'the real' is impossible. A notion of 'useful fictions' is offered, and suggestions are made for further engagement with representation and abstraction in school geography. |
| spellingShingle | Puttick, S Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title | Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title_full | Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title_fullStr | Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title_short | Should we only teach about real people and real places? |
| title_sort | should we only teach about real people and real places |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT putticks shouldweonlyteachaboutrealpeopleandrealplaces |