GA 2024 - Teaching 21st century competencies and geography

I had just returned from Manchester having attended the Geographical Association Annual Conference and Exhibition (GAACE). There were many insights shared by respected geographers and geography educators at the conference and I would like to share some here, which are helpful in shaping my thoughts on what and how might I move ahead with professional learning for self and others. 

Develop a set of beliefs, principles and provocations as a geography educator

While there were separate keynotes by Professors James Esson and Margaret Roberts and the presidential address by Denise Freeman, they finally appeared to coalesce into a meaningful whole for me. Esson and Roberts contextalised the future of our living world by emphasising the necessity to “decolonise geography”, to promote a geography with a “diversity of voices” while Freeman invited us to think about our “lived experiences” and how our personal context shaped the way we teach. 

To illustrate this further, Roberts’ titled her sharing as “Geographical questions for all? From all?” invoked us to think about questions about equity and access. Questions of ,“Who gets what, where and how?”, “What ought to be done” and “Why should we care?”are deeply philosophical yet, are the kind that our students are made to answer in their “O” and “A” level examinations. Instead of simply relegating them to answering frames or model essays to be memorised, these are fundamental questions of geographical conscience that we should be asking ourselves, as we go about in our daily lives. 

Similarly, Esson was asked by a participant what was a “growth moment” for him as a geographer. He candidly shared about his realisation that one of his uncle was gay and the difficulty he faced in accepting that in Ghana. When he realised the "situatedness" of himself as an individual in a societal and geographical context, it was particularly pertinent and liberating.As geography teachers, our craft and very being is constantly being shaped and reshaped by space and time in our society. How do we even make sense of this, he questioned.

I then recall reading a module on “Development of Geographic Thought” taught by professor Brenda Yeoh about two-and-a-half decades ago. We learnt about the paradigm shifts of geography that happened through the centuries from Humboldt to Haggett. The advantage of these vantage points are that they provide us with a good grounding to understand the motivations of thought, which I believe geography educators should develop in order to be a better teacher. Thus, I was challenged to think more deeply about my subject once again. How has geography shaped the way I think and behave as a person? 

This question may sound a little obvious, until we realise that among geography teachers and geographers, there appears to be a psychic connection between us. Whether it be methods of practice (like our undying love for the outdoors and fieldwork), the way we see the world (through the various social, environmental and economic lenses or theories, pun) or our bias towards environmental action and sustainability. How do we tap on these as a unifying identity to push ahead in this new post-covid world?

It came as no surprise therefore, we geography educators have a strong sense of beliefs, principles and provocations that can be leveraged to come together to inspire the next generation of geographers. The question of how to do it should never rest solely on the shoulders of the prescribed national curriculum. It is unfair that experiencing geography is limited to assigned curricular time only. How can we consider provisions beyond the prescribed curriculum to move ahead?   

Teaching about and for the future

In MOE lingo, we often use the term “teaching and learning” to describe the curricular, pedagogical and assessment processes that a teacher conducts in and outside the classroom. There is also a tendency to use “learn”, as we emphasise pedagogical procedures that cater to diverse learners through understanding their motivations and needs. The focus on “teach” in GAACE underscores the critical role of the teacher in shaping the enacted curriculum through his/her thoughts about the subject, deliberately influencing his/her students for a desired future. 

While as a fraternity, we are persuaded and are convinced of the need to teach 21^st century competencies in our geography curriculum, how we might do it will vary from teacher to teacher. Here are some questions to consider:

• What are the core beliefs that shape me as a person?
• How do these beliefs play out in my daily life and interactions with people and the environment?
• How might I convey these geographically to my students, so that they too, use the subject lens to navigate the world? 

These are questions I seldom ask myself as I go about dutifully delivering the prescribed curriculum, yet they sit squarely within my purview if I were to claim to “mould the future of Singapore”. With our renewed emphasis on 21cc, it is even more pertinent now. Therefore, I would challenge myself to find touch points in the curriculum that resonate strongly with me, think of examples which I can use as “teachable moments” for my students and pedagogies that are suitable for them in their contexts. 

In a gist, teaching for the future is more than just layering technological tools or using AI. We need to examine how geography (or any other subject for that matter) has shaped our identity, values and beliefs, think about how our thoughts and geography might help students navigate the world and their future, and how we could do it in a pedagogically sound manner. In failing to do this, we might just lose focus of teaching about the future and for the future. Instead, we end up merely teaching and using seemingly futuristic tools (which would be superseded by a newer release in a fortnight). We all could see this already happening. We need to dig deep into fundamentals and not end up chasing the latest release in GenAI, in an attempt to fulfil what we is deemed as “teaching about and for the future”.

Conversations, reflections and audit

In professional development, we value teachers’ voices and their reflection. We believe that these two ingredients, coupled with healthy support from a community would be key to growth. I gained an insight as I attended a concurrent session by Dr Rebecca Kitchen who shared about personal content audit. Because I went into the room late, I was stumped by the question she posted on the board “When was the last time you did a (subject) content audit?”. While this term “audit” sounded foreign to me, I recall that I had completed a portfolio for submission to become a master teacher (does that count as an audit?). 

Interestingly, an audit is not a requirement in Singapore. Annual lesson observations (conducted by reporting officers for the purposes of development and to a lesser extent, appraisal for some) is the norm. But is this serving the purpose of an audit? 

Instead, curriculum and pedagogical leaders in the department may encourage teachers to do an audit when a teacher is switching between different levels of teaching, or switching between teaching new groups of students, e.g. G2 to G3 or from G2 to G1. We can also consider an audit when we are teaching new topics in the curriculum as a team of teachers so that we are aware of existing fund of internal knowledge “within us” as teachers. We might be less fixated on physical resources “out there”. While I am not dismissing the importance of quality resources, I am suggesting that we look within first – what are our beliefs, values and identity that can be used to teach a particular unit? What about the funds of networks we can tap upon?

In the figure below, Kitchen shares the different aspects of an audit.

It helps too, if we are aware of the pitfalls before doing an audit. We should also be truly convinced of its effectiveness. If it were to be a mere paper exercise, we might be better off doing one. So, some questions that we might ask are:

• Do we have a strong culture of trust in the department?
• Do we agree that the audit is done is good faith, without the fear of being judged or appraised?
• Are we aware of resources to help us plug the gaps? Are we willing to use them? 

Conclusion

The geography chapter at AST has identified teacher identity and values to be the core of what we teach. We have evolved from the “tiered birthday cake” framework, to the internal structure of the earth framework this year, highlighting that the driving forces of pedagogies originate from the subject identity we have as teachers. In essence, it presents a tighter integration between "what and how we do" to the "why we do what we do".

To uncover identity, values and beliefs we have as geography educators, we need to:

• think and talk about them in the context of our changing and future worlds,
• understand our interactions with society and the environment,
• develop convincing pedagogies and examples to teach them to our students, and
• keep a handle on our content knowledge within a community of practitioners. 

The catch phrase “Teach It, Live It” sums it up neatly for us as we move ahead with new imperatives and new hope for a better tomorrow.

Reference:

GAACE 2024 Delegates Handbook, GA, pg 38

GA2024 - Field visit: Changing landscape of student housing

Introduction

By a twist of fate, I ended up with a field visit to understand the various student accommodation offered at the universities of Manchester (UM) and the Metropolitan Manchester (MMU). While I wasn’t too excited about it initially, what proved to be a “walk in the park” type of visit, demonstrated layers of complexity – competing urban development, citizen voices and the inevitable forces of economics. This field visit inspired me to consider weaving in narratives to our human geography topics in our geography curriculum, to bring out enduring concepts that makes geography a subject for everyone (more on this in a later post).

The University of Manchester (UM) has a long history of 200 years. Founded in 1824, it remains the seat of academic learning. MMU started out as a polytechnic and was later upgraded to a university specialising in vocational courses. Hence MU has a longer history in offering on-site student accommodation to local and international students among residential housing neighbourhoods that surround it. This is where the story gets going.

 

The MU housing story

MU owned parcels of land on its extensive campus where it provided university-controlled student accommodation. This is similar to universities in Singapore where we have the not so imaginatively numbered halls in NTU, to the those in NUS whose hall names are steeped in Singapore’s political history (such as Raffles and Sheares). What caused MU to cease providing large scale university-controlled student accommodation was because there were rent-strikes by students. Yes, you heard it right, rent strikes! These frequent strikes put MU in a difficult position – to provide housing to their students at the expense of losing a source of income. To demand that these vacate their premise ran contrary to their philosophy of students’ welfare.

 

To make things simpler, the idea of inviting private developers to raise blocks of private-built student accommodation (PBSA) was hence mooted. In the photographs below, it is clear that PBSA is the accommodation of choice for students at MU - modern plumbing, efficient heating and cooling, and a more conducive and secure environment for the students. The story would have ended here. Simple, just put everyone into PBSA, and tear down the old MU-owned accommodation.

Photo 1 - MU provided student accommodation is old and run-down.

 

Photo 2 - In contrast, PBSA are new and attractive (at much higher rental costs too)

Because this story happened in the context of existing residential neighbourhoods around MU, it was far from simple. When the demand of student accommodation went up, existing house owners in the neighbourhood decided to rent out their century-old housing stock to students. With this new “entrant” into the scene for student accommodation, things got messy. There were no longer controls over who, when, where and what were rented to students of MU. It became a free market of sorts. Often, unscrupulous landlords would sub-divide their units into smaller ones with the hope of making a windfall in rental. More enterprising ones even bought up an entire street of houses, converting them into cramped student spaces to rake in more money. Displacement and discontent followed. Existing residents had their arms up in the air, with the increased noise, litter and unauthorized sub-standard extensions. These changed the entire feel and culture of the neighbourhoods. We witnessed this physical change of housing stock within a 300 m stretch along Denmark Road and its side streets such as Acomb Street (photo 3).  

Photo 3 - These are century-old housing stock that is sub-divided and rented out to students

 

Because of PBSA being the more expensive accommodation option setting the bar, local landlords of these century-old workers’ houses also raised their rents, pricing local MU students out of the student accommodation market. This further led to sub-divisions of housing units for students to rent. As a result, the situation got so bad that many were paying over-priced accommodation in rather squalid conditions. 

 

Role of citizen advocacy

This story also showcased the strong community advocacy efforts of the local residents that live in the vicinity of MU and MMU. Due to the strong demand of PBSA, developers have been buying up land parcels within the neighbourhoods to build more and more PBSAs. The PBSAs are often multi-storied behemoths, dwarfing the local state-built housing stock. Old places were bulldozed and replaced with shiny glass and brick clad structures, whose inhabitants are ephemeral. Students come and go within years and lack the rootedness of local residents who have spent their entire life times living in these neighbourhoods.

 

Along the field visit, we were shown strong citizen action that opposed the building of a PBSA on a run-down pub site (photo 4) at Boundary Lane. Tis site has been the hot button issue for many residents who have lived their entire lives here, and many are in the 70s or older. There were fiery confrontations and contestations which resulted in a “block the block” movement by the locals (photo 5). Interestingly, a resident queried our field visit facilitator from her third level apartment if he was bringing buyers (all of us on the field visit) around the neighbourhood to shop for land. This clearly showed the tremendous involvement of the locals in resisting an inevitable economic process and an urban eventuality.

 

Photo 4 - The pub site which has temporarily turned into a carpark lot (the pub is the building in white)

Photo 5 - Evidence of resistance in the community 

The negotiation with local authorities did not always end up in a stalemate. We crossed the Epping Walk Bridge to enter MMU territory to reach what our field visit facilitator termed the boundary line between the universities’ zone and the inner-city zone at Old Birley Street. Down there, we saw how positive citizen effort and authorities’ willingness to listen resulted in a win-win for both parties. Community sensitive housing design that allow residents to interact above the street level, inclusion of local businesses, and the conversion of what was originally going to be a car parking facility into a community garden centre complete with a café can be found here, all demonstrating a possible urban solution. 

Photo 6 - Win-win community sensitive housing design that features suspended walkways that allow residents to interact, and locating local businesses at the ground level.

Photo 7 - The Hulme Community Garden Centre

 

What I learnt

 

Often, the world around us may be presented to our students as an unproblematic objective one. We study solutions that are couched in scientific and engineering terms. What human geography is and should uncover, is the humanistic angle of our world. Situating the MU student accommodation in a theme of “controversial development” offers to me an opportunity to learn about facts through real-life stories. How many of us Geography teachers are sensitive to the disciplinary lens Geography offers? How might we tap on these lenses to help our students understand the complexity of urban development, the importance of citizen voices and choices? How do we contextualise these conflicting perspectives in the wider world of policies and economics? 

 

If we do not appreciate these useful nexuses of connections as Geography teachers, we risk missing out the immense potential of this powerful subject in helping our students navigate their future. Unpacking 21^st century competencies alongside the geography curriculum, taking advantage of community stories as learning resources and linking them back to the broader goals of a geography education is a direction that we need to seriously consider if we were to nurture a generation of geographically literate and sensitive youths. Are we ready for this challenge?