Introduction

Eurocentric discourses of global development dominate the representation of nations in contemporary Geography curricula in England. Policy-driven examination specifications and textbooks for students aged 14-16 years focus on a European/Western model of economic development.  A ‘Europe/West is Best’ message is constituted through concepts of ‘developing’ world, deficit, dependency and paternalism to institute ‘a narration of difference’ (Winter, 2018). Since curriculum comprises the ‘raw material’ of education, its narratives contribute towards students’ and teachers’ sense of who they are (Todd, 2001). At a time of increasing ethnic diversity of students in classrooms and rising xenophobia and nationalism across Europe, the neglect of culturally inclusive curriculum knowledge has the potential to alienate and ‘other’ Black, Minority Ethnic (BME) students and teachers. This study investigates the indirect stigmatisation inherent within Geography’s global development curriculum in textbooks, examination specifications and classrooms in two multi-ethnic schools to lay foundations for co-constructing inclusive curriculum knowledge and educational practice.

Research questions

a) What narratives of global development dominate Geography examination specifications and textbooks?

b) What narratives of global development are held by BME and white British students and teachers?

c) How do student narratives of global development learned at home, in communities and via social media relate to those available in school?

d) How do teachers negotiate the tensions between school and out-of-school narratives of global development?

e) What narratives of global development should be taught in multi-ethnic schools?

Theoretical framework

The study is theoretically informed by first, Fraser’s 2007 ‘Parity of Participation’ framework which requires ‘social arrangements that permit all to participate as peers in social life’ (p. 27). This 3-fold framework embraces redistribution (allocation of economic resources); recognition (cultural recognition and valuing) and representation (political voice) as the foundation for educational justice (Fraser, 2008 a) & b)). The deployment of the framework will: avoid reification of BME cultures, histories and identities; treat BME cultural knowledges critically and appreciate the intersectionality between culture, race, class, gender and other characteristics in shaping culturally responsive curricula.

Various studies acknowledge the privileging of white, middle class, Eurocentric ways of knowing and being at the expense of the ‘other’ through the texts and interactions experienced in the Geography curriculum (Hicks, 1981; Winter, 1996 & 1997; Yapa, 2002; Lambert & Morgan, 2011; Winter, 2018), as well as the under-representation of BME Geography teachers in English schools (Garcia, 2017). Such privilege re-inscribes unequal patterns of cultural recognition and political representation (Keddie, 2012). The framework will be applied to a specific topic in the Geography curriculum in a way that responds to Fraser’s call to ‘tailor the remedy to the concrete arrangements that impede parity’ (2008 a) p. 137).

The second underpinning theoretical tenet is Gonzalez et al’s 2005 ‘Funds of Knowledge’ (FOK) which draws on the community life-worlds of students and families to construct rigorous and socially just curricula. Given the rising number of newly-arrived migrants in classrooms, together with the increasing standardisation of curriculum around traditional academic knowledge in England (Winter, 2018), the gaps between the socio-cultural knowledge of students, teachers and curriculum are widening. FOK provides ‘a new conceptual framework for informing effective practice for learning across diverse pupil backgrounds and experiences’ (Hogg, 2011, p.667), by engaging with students’ “expert” knowledge obtained from their families, households, communities and global experiences (Zipin, 2013).

Although positive FOK experiences (‘light’ FOK), are preferred by teachers, I take up Zipin’s (2009) call to address those ‘dark’ FOK, racial micro-aggressions (Doharty, 2018) and feelings of inequality and discrimination experienced by marginalised students which pervade Geography curriculum texts and classrooms, in order to expose, challenge and change racist Geographical knowledge currently sustaining the curriculum.

Phase 1: textual analysis of narratives of global development in GCSE examination specifications and associated texts, using Winter’s 2018 four-step deconstructive approach. This serves as a useful device for detecting and challenging Geography’s ‘imperial gaze’ embedded within teaching materials used in schools. It involves: a) identifying and questioning assumptions; b) investigating and c) transgressing totalising modernist tropes and d) generating ethical responses, thereby critiquing the assumedly neutral stance of authors’ representations, to move teachers’ and learners’ thinking beyond Eurocentrism. Phase 2: semi-structured interviews with Geography subject leaders in two multi-ethnic case study schools in an English city. The purpose is to elicit: a) subject leaders’ aims and priorities regarding their teaching of the topic of global development in Geography b) their views on the representation of global development in the GCSE specifications and textbooks c) any tensions they experience in teaching global development in a multi-ethnic setting d) suggestions for alternative representations and to collect a set of images which reflect the global development curriculum on offer in their school. Interviews will also be conducted with a second Geography teacher in each case study school to ensure a range of perspectives is available. Phase 3: classroom observations of lessons focusing on GCSE global development taught by subject leaders in each school. The researcher will observe the extent to which subject leaders’ stated aims are reflected in their pedagogies and student engagement. Phase 4: images collected from the subject leaders will form the basis of semi-structured interviews with ten individual BME students of diverse ethnic, racial and religious heritage who participated in the observed lessons in each school. Students will be aged 14-16 (Key stage 4). Their specific age will depend on the timing of global development in the school scheme of work. The aims are to first, elicit student acceptance/rejection/interpretation of narratives of global development represented in the lessons and second, to understand alternative representations gleaned from families, communities and social media. All interviews will be analysed using Braun and Clarke’s 2007 thematic approach. Phase 5: an analysis/impact workshop will be organised in each case study school, to which all student participants, Humanities teachers (Geography, History, RE, Citizenship), school leaders, parents and community leaders are invited. The aim is to share and bring further analytical rigour to the study findings and plan for appropriate wider dissemination and impact.

The project began in October, 2018 and ends in April 2020. Early findings, to date, based on lesson observations and preliminary text book analysis indicate: 1. dominance of Eurocentric narratives of global development in examination, textbook and classroom teaching materials 2. representation of Low-Income Countries (LIC) as deficit 3. minimum discussion of the impact of colonialism on the ‘causes of the Development Gap’ 4. critical responses of students to deficit representations and challenges to assumptions underpinning Geography's orthodoxy regarding pathways to economic development Important findings relating to the contemporary English curriculum policy context in both case study schools and include: a) high level pressure on teachers and student to improve performance in the GCSE examination and b) teachers’ responses to increase in ‘challenge’ built into the new GCSE specification and examination questions. These exert a powerful influence over teacher and student experiences of engagement in Geographical knowledge, for example, teaching to the test, drilling examination techniques, shifting from inquiry to transmission-based pedagogies. More rigorous and comprehensive findings will be forthcoming by the date of the conference. This study is supported by the British Academy/Leverhulme Trust Small Research Grant.

Braun, V and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’ Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101. Fraser, N. (2007) Feminist politics in the age of recognition: A two-dimensional approach to gender justice Studies in Social Justice 1 (1), 23-35. Fraser, 2008 a) Rethinking recognition: overcoming displacement and reification in cultural politics. In K. Olson (Ed). Adding insult to injury: Nancy Fraser debates her critics 129-141. Fraser, 2008 b) Reframing justice in a globalising world In K. Olson (Ed). Adding insult to injury: Nancy Fraser debates her critics 273-294. Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. & Amanti, C. (2005) (Eds). Theorizing education practice: funds of knowledge in households, London: Routledge 131-141. Hicks, D. (1981). Images of the world: What do geography text books actually teach about development? Cambridge Journal of Education, 11(1), 15–35. Hogg, L. (2011) Funds of Knowledge: An investigation of coherence within the literature Teaching and Teacher Education 22 (3), 666-677. Keddie, A. (2012) Schooling and social justice through the lenses of Nancy Fraser Critical Studies in Education 53 (3), 263-279. Lambert, D., & Morgan, J. (2011). Geography and development: Development education in schools and the part played by geography teachers. Development Education Research Centre Research Paper no 3. Institute of Education, University of London. Doharty, N. (2018) ‘‘I FELT DEAD’: applying a racial microaggressions framework to black students’ experiences of Black History Month and Black History,’ Race, Ethnicity and Education. Todd, S. (2001). Bringing more than I contain’: Ethics, curriculum and the pedagogical demand for altered egos. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33, 431–450. Winter C. (1996) Challenging the dominant paradigm in the Geography National Curriculum: reconstructing place knowledge. Curriculum Studies 4 (3), 367–384. Winter, C. (1997) Ethnocentric bias in geography textbooks: A framework for reconstruction. In D. Tilbury & M. Williams (Eds.), Teaching and learning in geography London: Routledge 180–188. Winter, (2018) Disrupting colonial discourses in the geography curriculum during the introduction of British Values policy in schools Journal of Curriculum Studies 50 (4), 456-475. Yapa, L. (2002). How the discipline of geography exacerbates poverty in the Third. World Futures, 34, 33–46. Zipin, L. (2013) ‘Engaging middle years learners by making their communities curricular: A finds of knowledge approach,’ Curriculum Perspectives, 33 (3), 1-12. Zipin, L. (2009) Dark Funds of Knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy: exploring boundaries between lifeworlds and schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 30, 317-331.