A Conversation about Place and Learning Progressions

In this special issue of the Journal of Geography you will find a “symposium”—a disciplinary conversation in print—on the topic of learning progressions as it concerns the concept of place. Learning progressions (LP) are new to geography (see Huynh, Solem, and Bednarz 2015), but an existing research base exists within science education. Understanding these progressions—“successively more sophisticated ways of thinking about a topic that can follow one another as children learn” (NRC 2007, 219)—may help geography educators to connect different ideas together on a specific topic to assist student learning.

The symposium is led off by Thomas Larsen and John Harrington's article on learning progressions and place (2018), which provides an overview of place within geography and other disciplines and delves into the challenges present when creating a LP for a “nebulous” concept such as place. Four commissioned responses follow, representing a range of perspectives that may be described as providing “the big picture” (Michael Solem), a “critical picture” (David Lambert), a “scientific picture” (Lindsey Mohan), and a “humanistic picture” (Eleanor Rawling). These authors were tasked with reacting to Larsen and Harrington's argument, and to provide additional thoughts on questions such as:

• What approaches should geographers take to advance transformative thinking about place and learning sciences in geography education?

• How might research on developing a learning progression for place be integrated into subjects in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)?

• How might research on developing a learning progression for place be integrated into subjects in the social studies and humanities?

• If a hypothetical learning progression were to be proposed for place, what progress variables might be used to understand student learning about place across grade levels?

Larsen and Harrington then close out the conversation with a summary response.

My own exposure to learning progressions—at least in these terms—is new over the past four years. I remain personally ambivalent about some aspects of learning progressions in geography, but that is why we talk. I do know, however, that I can speak with confidence for this group of authors on this point: we collectively hope that this conversation spurs you to consider what we really do know about geography education, what we might question, and what we hope to do better. Read on.