1154 | 787 | Analysing expert’ views on a renewed Dutch geography curriculum through an Anthropocene lens | Tine Beneker; Gijs van Campenhout; Rob van der Vaart
The Dutch geography curriculum for upper secondary level was designed almost 20 years ago. Since then, besides some adjustments, no fundamental changes have been made to this curriculum. The 150th anniversary of the Royal Dutch Geographical Society in 2023 and an expected national curriculum renewal in the coming years, provide the occasion for a renewed discussion about the geography curriculum. A symposium on the renewal of the Dutch geography curriculum, with teachers, curriculum experts, teacher trainers and academic geographers, takes place in March 2023. In preparation, we asked geography/geoscience scholars to give, in a short essay, their personal views on the questions and content that young people should be learning about in geography in upper secondary school in the coming decades. We did not ask them to reflect on the existing examination programmes nor to delve into developments in the school subject, but to simply, from the perspective of their daily work in geography/geosciences, indicate what content they consider worthwhile for pupils, now and in the future. Perspectives from both earth sciences and social sciences are represented in the essays. Current societal and spatial issues, such as migration and climate change, are discussed in changing contexts focussing on the Netherlands, Europe and the world/earth as a whole. Interestingly, the authors argue for the implementation of both classic geographical ‘content’ and new concepts. Further, many of them explicitly address the kinds of questions students should start asking and be working with in the classroom. In this paper presentation, we apply an Anthropocene lens to analyse the 20 essays. From a curriculum analytical view, we can distinguish conceptual, empirical and procedural knowledge(s) in these essays and distil the characteristics of the ‘powerful (disciplinary) knowledge(s)’.
Tine Beneker; Gijs van Campenhout; Rob van der Vaart
Utrecht University
ID Abstract: 787