“How useful is the concept of ‘capability’ in

assessing the purpose of geography in

education?”

Richard Bustin, Geography teacher, Bancroft’s school. rbustin@gmail.com

MPhil/ PhD student, Institute of Education.
BACKGROUND

Geography branded ‘boring’ and ‘irrelevant’ (Ofsted 2008, 2011)

Decline in pupils opting to take the subject at GCSE and A level.

Curriculum planning now around ‘key concepts’- Place, Space, Scale, Interdependence, Physical
and Human processes, Cultural understanding and diversity.

2011: National Curriculum review- geography? English Baccalaureate? Core knowledge?

“without a substantial geographical component, it is possible to argue that young people will be
restricted in their capacity to make sense of the complex, unequal, fast changing and often
dangerous world in which they live” (Lambert 2008).

Butt (2008) warns “the study of what we might still call ‘geographical issues’ will certainly
continue in schools, colleges and universities – for understanding about such issues is important
to any young person who wishes to become an autonomous, responsible and enlightened
‘global citizen’. Unfortunately, these issues are no longer recognised as being fundamentally
‘geographical’ – if current trends continue it is possible that they will not be taught by
geographers in future” (p.164).
 Purpose
Purpose ofofgeography
geography (2010s):
(2010s):

-- GA
GAmanifesto “A different
manifesto “A view” (2009)
different view”
-‘Thinking Geographically’ (Jackson 2000)
(2009)
- ‘Grammar’ and ‘vocabulary’ of geography.
-‘Thinking Geographically’ (Jackson
2000)
- ‘Grammar’ and ‘vocabulary’ of
geography.

BUT:
BUT:
-Thinking skills (about what?)
--Geographical
Thinking skills (about
content what?)2010)
of ITT? (Roberts
-- Geographical content of ITT?
Political interference?
-Corruption of the curriculum? (Standish 2007)
(Roberts 2010) (Rawling 2000)
-Ideological differences?
- Political interference?
-Corruption of the curriculum?
(Standish 2007)
-Ideological differences? (Rawling
2000)

Rawling 2000 p212

 CAPABILITY APPROACH Welfare economics: Sen (1980), Nussbaum (2000)

COMMODITY/
CAPABILITY
STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONING
(SET)
FEATURES

Wellbeing capability Nussbaum Humanities capability (Hinchcliffe 2006)

(2000) Educational capability (Terzi 2005) •Critical Examination and Judgement
•Life. •Literacy.
•Narrative imagination
•Bodily Health. •Numeracy.
•Recognition/concern for others (citizenship in
•Bodily Integrity. •Sociality and participation.
a globalised world)
•Senses, Imagination, and •Learning dispositions.
•Reflective learning (ability to articulate and
Thought. •Physical activities.
revise personal aims)
•Emotions.  •Science and technology.
•Practical judgement (in relatively complex
•Practical Reason.  •Practical reason.
situations)
•Affiliation. •Take responsibility for others
•Other Species. 

Geography capability (Lambert 2011)

Overall, it can be argued, a capability perspective on geography in education evokes a subject that can contribute to young
people’s:

•Deep descriptive ‘world knowledge’

•Theoretically informed relational understanding of people and places in the world
•Propensity and disposition to think about alternative social, economic and environmental futures.
THE RESEARCH: “How useful is the concept of ‘capability’ in assessing the purpose of
geography in education?”

STRUCTURAL FEATURES GEO CAPABILITY FUNCTIONING

1. What affects the development of geo capabilities with students in real school settings?
2. How do students of geography use their subject to understand the world, and how does
this fit in to a (geo-) capabilities perspective?
3. How might a ‘geo capabilities’ framework provide a way for curriculum makers to see the
value of school geography?

RESEARCH METHODS: Interviews with geography students (different ages)

in different school settings, interviews with university lecturers
(admissions tutors), geography teachers.
REFERENCES (selected)

Butt G (2008) Is the future secure for geography education, Geography 93 (3) p158- 165.

Goudie, A (1993) Schools and universities- the great divide, Geography 78 (4) p 338-9

Jackson P (2006) Thinking Geographically, Geography 91 (3), p 199-204.

Lambert D (2008) Why are school subjects important? Forum, 50, 2. Available form www.wwwords.co.uk.
Lambert D (2009) (ed), A different View, a manifesto from the Geographical Association. Sheffield:
Geographical Association.
Lambert D (2011) Reframing school geography: A Capability approach. In Butt (ed) Geography, Education and
the Future. Continuum.
Nussbaum M (2000) Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ofsted (2008) Geography in schools- changing practice. Press release. Available at www.ofsted.gov.uk.
Rawling E (2000) Ideology, politics and curriculum change: reflections on school geography 2000, Geography,
85 (3), p. 209-220.

Roberts M (2010) Where’s the Geography? Reflections on being a senior examiner. Teaching Geography 35 (3) p
112- 113.
Sen A (1980) Equality of what? The Tanner Lecture on human values delivered at Stanford University May 22, 1979.
Standish A (2007) Geography used to be about maps, In Whelan (ed) The corruption of the Curriculum.
London: CIVITAS.