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 |