Time for geography to catch up with the world

Abstract

This article makes the case that the subject of geography needs to change if we do not want another generation of students to leave school with an outdated view of the world (Rosling et al., 2018). Firstly, we need to ensure that resources and teaching do not present a binary view of developed versus developing countries, as is the case with some exam specifications. I call for the usage of more precise language to describe the bulk of countries that sit between low and high-income countries. Teachers are encouraged to make use of Rosling’s Four Income Levels as a graduated conceptual framework to help students understand the range of countries and living conditions experienced. Secondly, development theories need to transcend reductionist and diminished notions of development (such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)) and include a deeper idea of progress – one that encompasses cultural growth, economic and political transformation and affords nations the freedom to chart their own paths.

‘What’s a middle income country?’ asked one year 10 student.

‘There aren’t any’, replied another.

Notes

1. Hans Rosling (1948–2017) was co-founder of the Gapminder Foundation.

2. Income levels devised by Gapminder – data from PovcalNet and the International Monetary Fund, adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity at US$ in 2011.

3. The World Bank use annualised Gross National Income per capita converted from local currency using Atlas method.

4. Cost of living at Purchasing Power Parity exchange rates.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Alex Standish

Dr Alex Standish is Senior Lecturer in Geography Education at UCL Institute of Education, London, UK (email: [email protected]).