-
This article was downloaded by: [University of Cambridge]On: 30
October 2014, At: 16:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered
in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of GeographyPublication details, including instructions
for authors and subscription
information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjog20
Recent Trends in School Geography in IndiaSarfaraz Alam aa
Department of Geography , Banaras Hindu University , Varanasi,
IndiaPublished online: 25 Nov 2010.
To cite this article: Sarfaraz Alam (2010) Recent Trends in
School Geography in India, Journal of Geography, 109:6,
243-250,DOI: 10.1080/00221341.2010.502944
To link to this article:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2010.502944
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy
of all the information (the Content) containedin the publications
on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the
accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication
are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of
or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be
liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,
expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in
relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private
study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction,
redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply,
or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms
& Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
-
Recent Trends in School Geography in IndiaSarfaraz Alam
ABSTRACTThis article critically examines therecommendations of
two major Indianeducation reportsNCFSE 2000 andNCF 2005prepared by
the NationalCouncil of Educational Research andTraining in India.
The NCFSE 2000 hasrecommended an integrated teaching ofgeography as
one component of thesocial studies. The NCF 2005 has revertedto the
pre-NCFSE 2001 framework,wherein all subjects under the bannerof
social studies would now be taughtindependently. These conflicting
reports,and additional disagreement over theteaching of local
Indian versus worldgeography, are investigated regardingtheir
implications for teaching geographyto Indian students.
Key Words: curriculum reform, geographyeducation, India
Dr. Sarfaraz Alam is a senior lecturer in theDepartment of
Geography at Banaras HinduUniversity, Varanasi, India.
If we shrink the limits of geography, the greater field will
still exist: it willbe only our awareness that is diminished.
Carl Sauer (1956, 394)
If geography ceases to introduce students to a systematically
organizedpicture of the world in which we live, some other
subject-matter field will becalled upon to fill this need.
Preston James (1967, 5253)
INTRODUCTIONRecent curricular reforms in India have greatly
impacted the standing of
geography in the countrys schools. The National Curriculum
Frameworkfor School Education (NCFSE; NCERT [2000]) and the
National CurriculumFramework (NCF; NCERT [2005]), prepared by two
separate committees ofeminent educators and scholars under the
aegis of the National Council ofEducational Research and Training
(NCERT),1 India, have been fiercely contestedin the national print
and electronic media by educators, social scientists,
andpoliticians of different ideologies. However, Indian geographers
have not fullyparticipated in these contentious debates despite the
fact that these documentshave adversely affected teaching geography
in Indian schools.
The NCERT has always considered geography as an independent part
of thesocial sciences2 in school curricula. Importantly, the
teaching of geography withinthe NCERT framework focused on the
development of geographical knowledge,skills, attitudes, and values
among children. In this sense, though geographyconstituted a part
of the social sciences, its teaching was according to the spiritand
philosophy of the discipline. Geography syllabi included subjects
such as thegeography of India as well as world geography. However,
the NCFSE (NCERT2000) and the NCF (NCERT 2005) recommendations have
brought changes inthese two aspects of school geography in India.
In the first place, the NCFSE(NCERT 2000) report recommended fully
subsuming geographic instruction intothe social sciences, whereby
it was to be taught in combination with history,political science,
economics, and sociology. The report also recommended a morefocused
study of local and Indian geography at the expense of world
geography.While the NCF (NCERT 2005) report returned geography to
its status as anindependent subject, it too undermined the study of
world geography in favorof greater focus on Indian local, regional,
and national geography. The purposeof this article is to critically
examine the rationale of these two influential reportsand their
implications for geographic education in Indian schools.
EVOLUTION OF GEOGRAPHY EDUCATION IN INDIAN SCHOOLSGeography was
adopted as a compulsory subject of scientific study at the
school
stage in the second half of the nineteenth century (Kumar 2005).
The British Empireintroduced geography in India during this period
with a clear understandingthat geography had both symbolic and
practical value. The symbolic valueof geography can be best seen
through maps. Overtly, the objective of map-based geographic
instruction was to heighten Indian students grasp of worldregions.
Alongside this pedagogic goal, however, was an imperial design to
makeIndian students aware of the pervasive sway of the British
Empire and producesubmissive Indian subjects. Hudson (1994, 326),
in his study of the teaching of
Journal of Geography 109: 243250C2010 National Council for
Geographic Education 243
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Sarfaraz Alam
geography in British colonial schools, points to the factthat
maps and books used in the classroom were typicallydesigned to
reinforce students awareness and acceptanceof the British Empire in
which the colonies and theirpeoples played vital, though
subservient, roles. Further, heelaborated that classroom maps of
the world, generouslysplashed with red, emphasized the might and
dominanceof the Empire, so that when the geography teacherspun the
globe in the schoolroom, the students couldsee only the red of the
British Empire (Hudson 1994,326).
During the imperial era, geography was also a scienceof great
practical value. The modest science education(including geography
education) imparted was used as ameans to expand and consolidate
the British Empire in Indiaand to extract maximum profits from the
country (Sangwan1990). In this sense, geography as a subject was
used asan aid for colonization and consolidation of
administrationon the colonized land and its people.
Perhaps it is because of its role in the expansion,
consol-idation, and administration of the British Empire in
Indiathat geography found little favor in the school curricula
inpostindependence India. The undermining of geography asa school
subject can be gauged by studying the reports ofthe committees and
commissions on school education in thepostindependence period.
Geography as a separate subjectwas evidently out of favor in the
Report of the SecondaryEducation Commission ([Mudaliar Commission]
1953, 81).The report stated:
It is not often realized that the complaint ofovercrowding [in
the curriculum] is largelydue to [a] multiplicity of subjects
prescribedas separate entities without bringing theirorganic
interrelationships. Thus it is psy-chologically preferable to
present subjectscentering around the study of social envi-ronment
and human relations under thecomprehensive heading of social
stud-ies than to teach a number of separatesubjects like history,
geography, civics andeconomics in watertight compartments
assegregated wholes [that] lacking (sic)coordination and compassion
[;] rather knitthem in a completely whole (sic) [,]assigning their
due places in the universeof educational thought and set up.
Similarly, the Kothari Commission (1966) also advocatedfor the
study of geography within the framework of socialstudies.3 The
report advocated that geography should startin the higher primary
school (classes V, VI, and VII). In thehigher primary stage social
studies may continue as anintegrated course if competent teachers
and the requisitefacilities are available; otherwise the study of
history,geography and civics should be taken up as
separatedisciplines. The report further suggested:
At the lower primary stage, the integratedapproach is desirable.
Instead of givingthe pupils miscellaneous and unrelated bitsof
information in history, geography andcivics, it is far better to
provide a coordi-nated program of social studies centeringround the
study of man and his environ-ment. In the upper classes of the
primaryschools, the content of social studies maystill be organized
as an integral whole inconnection with the treatment of
certaintopics, but the pupils should be graduallyintroduced to an
appreciation of history,geography and civics as separate
subjects.In the secondary schools, these subjects willbe treated as
separate disciplines and formthe basis of specialized studies in
socialsciences at the higher secondary stage.(Kothari Commission
1966, 201)
Not all elements of Indias education establishment soughtto
marginalize geography. For instance, the Government ofMysore (now
Karnataka), in the meeting of the StandingCommittee of the Central
Advisory Board of School Educa-tion (SCCOBSE; Ministry of Human
Resource Development1997, 293), deplored the marginal position of
geography andhistory in the school curriculum and emphatically
arguedfor taking them seriously in school education:
The present position of Social Studies inthe School Curriculum
leads one nowhere.It has been found by experience that thepupils
who come out of S.L.L.C. exami-nation do not posses knowledge of
eventhe rudimentary of geography and historyof India. It is very
necessary that a strongfoundation is laid in both history
andgeography of India if a sense of patriotismin our younger
generation is required togrow. A special Committee of experts maybe
appointed to examine this question andformulate a syllabus to
remedy the fallingstandards in the study of history and geog-raphy
of India.
Despite such support for geography in the school curricula,and
subsequent suggestions towards its improvements inschools, it has
remained a marginal subject within thebroader framework of social
studies.
GEOGRAPHY BEFORE THE NCF (NCERT 2005) ANDTHE NCFSE (NCERT
2000)
A review of NCERT-approved textbooks published inthe last
quarter of the twentieth century identified threeapproaches to the
study of geographyregional geog-raphy, systematic geography, and
practical geographythat predominate in Indias school curricula. In
regional
244
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Recent Trends in School Geography in India
geography, the concentric model of learning was practiced.In
this students were taught about the various areasof Earth, starting
with the geography of the local andimmediate areas and culminating
with the distant (to India)areas of Earth. In primary classes (III,
IV, and V) theregional geography of the state and India were
taught. Insecondary classes (VIVIII) all the continents and
majorcountries of the world were covered. In this way, inlower
classes the emphasis was on the geography of theimmediate
surroundings of children. The size of regionalunits was smaller and
elementary knowledge about theregion was imparted. At higher
stages, more distantand larger regional units were studied. One
exceptionwas the study of the geography of India, which wastaught
in both secondary and higher secondary classes.However, in this
case the treatment was much moreelaborate.
The thrust of teaching regional geography has beento help
children acquire geographical knowledge rangingfrom microregional
units to meso and macro units, ulti-mately leading to the study of
the whole Earth. The priorityhad been to teach the elements of
regional environmentsand the way of life of different people. The
emphasiswas also laid on inculcating an understanding of
regionaldifferences and similarities. However, teaching
regionalgeography was not devoid of shortcomings. A study byKumar
(1996) suggests that the treatment of the regionswas very short and
encyclopedic in form. The learningprocess was excessively dry and
burdensome for children.The presentations of the lessons were
equally uninteresting.Therefore, schoolchildren used to simply
memorize text-books or answers to questions given at the end of
theirlessons without understanding the basic principles of
thediscipline.
In systematic geography the emphasis has been onstudying
phenomena in terms of their significance tohuman beings at all
geographical scalesstarting from thelocal and culminating with the
global scale. In lower classesonly those geographical phenomena
were taught that hada predominant presence in the immediate
surroundings ofchildren, while in the higher classes the focus of
teachingwas on phenomena that occurred worldwide. The majordrawback
of books on systematic geography was thatthese were mainly
descriptive in nature. Large numbersof facts and figures were
presented. Another importantshortcoming of systematic geography
teaching was thattopics were always treated in isolation. These
books weremostly concerned with the where of some phenomenawithout
writing much about their why (Kumar 1996).Therefore, the whole
exercise was not only dull but alsoof very little use.
Practical geography, including fieldwork, constitutedthe third
aspect of school geography, wherein relevantgeographical skills,
tools, and techniques were taught atall stages of schooling.
However, this aspect was the leastplanned and most neglected part
of school geography.Fieldwork and excursions were rarely conducted
in schools,
and globes, maps, and other tools of geographical
represen-tations were scarcely available.
GEOGRAPHY IN THE NCFSE (NCERT 2000):GEOGRAPHY IN AN INTEGRATED
CURRICULUM
One of the important recommendations of the NCFSE2000 was to
reduce the curriculum load on schoolchildren.It had identified two
important sources for the burdensomecurricula. To begin with, it is
often alleged that therehas been an undue emphasis on memorization
of a largenumber of lifeless facts, particularly in geography
andhistory textbooks. Reiterating the recommendations of thereport
on Learning Without Burden (National AdvisoryCommittee [Yash Pal
Committee] 1993), the documentemphasized developing concepts and
the ability to analyzesociopolitical realities rather than on the
mere retention ofinformation without comprehension. Though
memorizingfacts is often boring and burdensome for
schoolchildren,facts cannot be discarded on this ground only.
Knowledge ofuseful and interesting facts is important, as they
constitutethe edifice for the development of concepts,
generalizations,and theories. Some facts are also intrinsically
interesting inthemselves. For example, knowledge about distant
peoples,places,, and environments helps students broaden their
ge-ographical horizon and prepares them to appreciate the ex-isting
similarities and differences on Earths surface as well.
The second reason that is generally given by the cur-riculum
planners relates to the overlapping of topics andthemes in social
studies in the schools. In this context, it isimportant to note
that the objective of school education isas much on learning
information as it is on comprehendingconcepts, methods,
perspectives, and acquiring skills usedin different disciplines. A
topic can be a subject of study ofmany disciplines. However, all
disciplines see the problemthrough their own lenses. Therefore, a
reduction of loadcannot be logically justified merely on these
grounds.Can there be any unstated reason behind this move? Itis
important to note that the issue of curriculum loadreduction has
been discussed in the social science sectionof the curriculum only.
In this context, Y. Singh (1986, 103)has made an important
observation:
In cultural modernization through educa-tion often more positive
value is associatedwith learning of physical and
biologicalsciences, medicines, and engineering ratherthan the
humanities and social sciences.The reason for this association is
not onlythat science education has [a] more mod-ernizing effect
than [the] arts but becausethis education creates manpower which
isindispensable for economic and industrialgrowth. Nevertheless, if
the education of asubstantial profession in science and
engi-neering contributes to modernization of so-ciety, education in
the humanities and socialsciences contributes to the
modernization
245
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Sarfaraz Alam
of man. One must not be considered lesssignificant than
others.
Whatever the reasons for reducing curriculum loads,curriculum
integration is questionable both on theoreticaland practical
grounds. The integration of different sub-jects is an
intellectually challenging task as it requiresthe preservation of
differences between subjects withoutinterfering with their
underlying relationships. It becomeseven more difficult when one
intends to integrate subjectsthat have diverse philosophical
foundations, like history (achronological science), geography (a
chorological science),and political science, economics, and
sociology (systematicsciences). History and geography may be
thought of asnot having their own subject matters of study;
rather,they are distinguished by their methods of study.
Historydeals with changes through time while geography dealswith
variations on Earths surface. On the other hand,civics, economics,
and sociology have their own subjectmatters of study. Integrating
such dissimilar disciplines isan exceedingly difficult task. There
is no guarantee thatthe basic concepts of individual disciplines
will get dueattention in the integrated situation. Similarly, one
is notsure that integrated learning puts children in the
optimumlearning situation. It also raises concern about how
theteacher will cope with the demands of instructing studentsin an
extremely amorphous field of social sciences.
Some important issues are worth examining purelyfrom the point
of view of geography. Experiences fromseveral countries suggest
that integrated curriculum canhave negative implications on the
quality of geographyeducation in the school. It has been found that
in countrieswhere geography has been integrated with social
studiesdisciplines it has usually lost the natural connection
withthe physical sciences and become a minor component of
thebroader field of social sciences. In some cases,
geographicinstruction is attenuated to the extent that is serves
merelyas a source of examples for historical instruction.
Bednarzs(1998, 86) study of integrated curriculum in the state
ofVirginia in the United States, for example, points out
that,Geography appears as a way to make history concrete, notas a
tool of analysis or a discipline deserving of study in andof
itself. Students will be directed to trace the routes thatmap
colonial possession and describe geographical featuresof many
places, but not to use geography to understandthe past, present,
and future. Further, teaching integratedsocial sciences would also
imply that a single teacher (whomay not have required training to
teach geography) may begiven the responsibility to teach geography
in combinationwith history, civics, and economics. It is important
to notethat the teaching of geography requires some
specializedskills like the construction of a scale, drawing,
reading andinterpretation of maps, and conducting fieldwork,
amongothers. In the absence of trained geography teachers,
prac-tical geography would be further marginalized in
schoolcurricula. Thus, it seems that the geography curriculum
wasprepared by the NCFSE (NCERT 2000) on the assumption
that anyone can teach geographyan assumption thatwill not result
in the kind of geography that honors orbest represents our science,
or prepares our students toface the challenges of an increasingly
diverse, troubled, andcomplex world (Gritzner 2004, 44).
Another major problem that is likely to arise withan integrated
social studies curriculum is the neglect ofphysical geography.
There is a broad agreement within thegeographical community that
physical geography consti-tutes the bedrock of the discipline. The
serious study ofthe subject cannot begin without the findings of
physicalgeography; the play cannot proceed without a stage and itis
a stage, be it noted, which plays a much larger part in theaction
than in theatrical performances (Wooldridge andEast 1966, 26).
Therefore, geography education in schoolsrequires striking a
balance between geography as a physicalscience and as a social
science. An awareness of theintricate relationships between man and
his environmentis a major realm of scholarly investigation and
informedconcern on the part of all men who profess to be educated.A
heightened understanding of such relationships can begained only
through a disciplined investigation of bothsides of the fence, the
natural environment, physical andbiotic; and the human or cultural
one. As a discipline geog-raphy endeavors to maintain this
perspective (Aschmann1962, 284).
It must be noted that geology as a discipline has neverbeen
taught as a separate subject in Indian schools. Lessonson the
interior of Earth, as well as on processes and featuresof Earth,
which constitute subject matters of geology, weretaught in physical
geography classes. Similarly, elementarylessons in astronomy were
also given in physical geographyclasses. In a scenario where
geography is amalgamated intothe social sciences, children would be
placed at risk of notlearning about relations of Earth with other
celestial bodiesand the nature of physical and biotic features and
processof Earths surface.
Another controversial recommendation has been that ofthe NCF
(NCERT 2005). The controversy in this case relatesto the documents
proposal for a more focused study ofIndia and its regions while
remaining noncommittal on theneed for the study of world geography.
This is discussed inthe next section.
GEOGRAPHY IN THE NCF (NCERT 2005):ASCENDANCY OF LOCAL
STUDIES
The NCF (NCERT 2005) was prepared to address theconcerns of a
large number of Indian academicians aboutthe NCFSE (NCERT 2000). A
majority of social scientistswere unhappy with the integrated
social studies cur-riculum, both on theoretical and practical
grounds. Theystrongly protested against this integrated curriculum
inboth popular and academic media. In view of the strongresentment
expressed by social scientists, the NCF (NCERT2005) reverted to the
pre-NCFSE (NCERT 2000) framework,wherein all subjects grouped under
the social sciences
246
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Recent Trends in School Geography in India
would no longer be taught in integrated manner. If the NCF(NCERT
2005) brought positive changes by recommendingindependent teaching
of geography, it ignored a veryimportant aspect of school
geography. The documentclearly undermined one of the basic
objectives of geographyeducation by not including world
geography.
The debate over local geography versus world geographyin school
curricula is not new. Back in 1975 the NCERT doc-ument The
Curriculum for the Ten-Year School had stronglyadvocated in favor
of the study of world geography.The document stated that the
development of nationalconsciousness and the development of
international under-standing should be one simultaneous process.
Tolerance,friendship, cooperation and peace between nations
arepossible only with a proper appreciation of each
countryscontribution to the world (NCERT 1975, 4). Elsewhere
itstated that the geography curriculum should bring hometo the
pupils the interdependence of various regions of thecountry and the
world. They should begin to appreciatethat it is only through
sharing with others that the peoplesof the world can really enjoy
the blessings of the motherearth ( 22).
A decade later the National Curriculum for Elementaryand
Secondary Education: A Framework (NCERT 1988) re-emphasized the
value and importance of world geography.The document suggested that
the school curriculum, whilepromoting national identity and unity
should also strive tocreate among the pupils an awareness of the
necessity topromote peace and understanding between nations for
theprosperity of all mankind. The curriculum should reflectsome of
the major issues facing the world. . . it will haveto make the
pupils aware of the concept of world as afamily of nations, the
distinct culture of each nation and theinterdependence among
nations. . . the school curriculum[should enable the student]. . .
to see himself/herself as amember of the new and emerging
international communityof mankind (1988, 6).
These objectives had to be fulfilled particularly throughthe
geography and civics curriculum. But, both the NCFSE(NCERT 2000)
and the NCF (NCERT 2005) have ignoredthe study of world geography
and its implications interms of developing an international
perspective amongschoolchildren. Instead, they have focused
exclusively onthe study of India and her contribution to the
world.Local studies can be considered as important for
impartinggeographical concepts, skills, and values, but these
alonecannot constitute the subject matter of geography. It
isabsolutely true that the teaching of geography by givingexamples
from childrens surroundings would help themto comprehend the
disciplines concepts and skills. What,however, is equally important
is to teach about othergeographical regions of the world,
particularly in this eraof globalization.
One of the main complaints about regional geographyhas been that
it puts an unnecessary burden on studentsby forcing them to learn
in a dull and boring fashion. Itis indeed desirable that the
teaching of the subject should
be freed from the excessive factual burden that puts
anunnecessary burden on its students. However, the factthat world
geography is sometimes taught in a dull anddreary fashion does not
justify removing it from the schoolsyllabus. In fact, this problem
arises because there has beenan ad hoc approach to the study of
world geography,without any serious thought on its pedagogy.
Worldgeography textbooks have been very poorly presented.Poor
pedagogy adds to the problem. However, it must beacknowledged that
writing and teaching about regions ofthe world is a difficult art
to master. Therefore, we needgood world geography textbooks, maps,
and atlases as wellas teacher training to improve its teaching. We
can ill affordto ignore world geography. If we remove world
geographyfrom schools, the ability to think about the world
andimagine it as a mosaic of peoples, places, and environmentswill
diminish in the minds of the future citizens of India.Therefore,
world geography needs to be refocused in viewof increased
connectivity across geographical space.
One point that must be repeatedly stressed is thatinclusion of
world geography will contribute in developinga more sensitive
perspective towards different regions. If itis valid for children
from countries other than India to betaught the geography of India,
then it can be asked whyIndian children should be denied their
right to learn aboutthe geography of other regions of the world. To
illustratethis point, a comparison of the levels of
geographicalliteracy in the United States and India can be
mentionedhere. In the United States, geography is not a
compulsoryschool subject. It is taught as part of the broader
socialstudies. On the other hand, geography has always been amajor
school subject in India. It is only natural that amongyoung
Americans the level of geographical literacy has beenfound to be
lower compared to Indian students (Sukhwal1984, 228). Recent
surveys also show that geographyknowledge among students in the
United States ranks farbelow that of students in such countries as
Japan, the UnitedKingdom, Germany, and Canada. Even worse, the
level ofgeographical knowledge among U.S. youth has declinedover
the years, so much so that many children cannot readmaps or locate
states, cities, or important physical features,even in the United
States itself (Shirey n.d.).
In this context, David Harvey (2001, 210) quotes MarthaNussbaum
to emphasize the critical importance of geog-raphy education in the
contemporary world. Nussbaumcomplains how the United States is
unable to look at itselfthrough the lens of the other, and, as a
consequence, [is]equally ignorant of itself precisely because the
populationis so appallingly ignorant of the rest of the world. In
orderto conduct any adequate global dialogue, she continues,
We need knowledge not only of the ge-ography and ecology of
other nationssomething that would already entail muchrevision of
our curriculabut also agreat deal about other people, so that
intalking with them we may be capable
247
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Sarfaraz Alam
of respecting their traditions and com-mitments. Cosmopolitan
education wouldsupply the background necessary for
thisdeliberation. (Nussbaum, cited in Harvey2001, 210)
Knowledge and understanding about the geography ofthe world can
be useful for students of other disciplinesas well. A student
wishing to learn about the growth ofthe British Empire should
necessarily develop an under-standing of the location and
geographical surroundingsof Great Britain. Similarly, a student of
political scienceintending to learn about federalism in India must
developknowledge of its highly multifaceted regional geographyto
develop knowledge and sensitivity about the necessityof federalism.
Similar examples can be cited from thedisciplines of economics and
sociology as well.
Neglect of world geography may also hamper
childrensunderstanding of their local surroundings. On the
contrary,the study of different regions and countries would only
helpin enhancing childrens knowledge and understanding oftheir
local situations.
Doing local studies of ones home baseis good and necessary but
alone it is notenough. It may be a place to start but fromthat
local base we need also to be ableto trace out and understand its
intricateconnections to the wider world. We need todevelop a global
understanding of the local.Quite apart from anything else, if we do
nothave that we shall never even understandhow the local place
comes to be as it is.(Massey 1999, 264)
A sound knowledge of world geography would enrichinternational
understanding and enhance goodwill amongdifferent peoples of the
world. On the other hand, lack ofknowledge about other peoples,
places, and environmentsmay lead to the development of
parochialism, intolerance,and prejudice among children. Lessons in
world geographyalso increase childrens awareness about global
interdepen-dence and connectivity.
. . . each of our lives, places and societiesis constituted
through wider geographies,and yet that in itself can hide the
inter-relations on which we depend: the otherpeoples and societies
whose lives are inex-tricably linked to our own, whose actionshave
consequences for us and who arethemselves affected by decisions of
ourown. (Massey 1999, 264)
Knowledge and understanding about world geographyenlarges pupils
horizons by allowing them to journey intheir imagination into the
geographically varied areas ofthe world. The study of geography
books, globes, andmaps takes pupils far and wide in its description
ofhuman lives and peoples activities as they relate to varying
conditions of physical, spatial, and built
environments.Different communities have evolved these practices
over along period of time, according to the specific
circumstancesof their relationship with the natural environment. In
thisway, it is the right of every child to know how
differentpeoples, places, and the environment of the Earth look,
andare different from or similar to them.
THE WAY FORWARDAmong geographys academic credentials is the
manner
in which it can captivate students interests in peoples,places,
and environments. Johnston (1985, 334) argued thatgeographys raison
detre should be to develop appreci-ation of the great variety of
cultures that comprise thecontemporary world, and to show how in
each society thesehave evolved and are evolvingas a specific
response toenvironment, to place and people. According to PrestonE.
James (1971, 333334), geography sharpens our worldunderstanding in
four unique ways: (i) geography presentsan effective treatment of
the land factor in the study ofman-land relationships; (ii)
geography places emphasison the significance to the man of the
differences whichoccur from place to place on the surface of the
earth;(iii) geography teaches the reading and understandingof the
map; and (iv) geography develops the capacityof out-of-door
observation. In addition the function of[school] geography is to
train future citizens to imag-ine accurately the condition of the
great world stageand so help them to think sanely about political
andsocial problems in the world around (Fairgrieve 1926,18).
In view of these reasons, geography merits an in-dependent
position in the framework of Indian schooleducation. However, if
one looks at the recommendationsmade by NCFSE (NCERT 2000) and NCF
(NCERT 2005),one cannot help but feel the lack of sensitivity
towardsschool geography. The on-again, off-again integration
ofgeography in social studies and the manifest neglect ofworld
geography marginalize the discipline in schoolcurricula and hamper
the very purpose of teaching thediscipline. Teaching geography as a
separate subject witha strong component of world regions would be a
far morepractical approach.
There is no doubt about the fact that children learnbest through
firsthand experiences that can be gained bystudying the geography
of their local community. However,these experiences should not be
an end in themselves;rather these should be linked to the
understanding ofregional and world situations. Every attempt should
bemade to give the child an understanding of the
relationshipsbetween the home area and other parts of the
world(Gault 1962). The ever-increasing interconnectedness
andinterdependencies among the countries of the world, theincrease
in travel facilities in an ever shrinking world, thegrowing
complexities of international problems, increasingdisparities in
levels of development at all geographicalscales, and continuing
degradation and depletion of natural
248
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Recent Trends in School Geography in India
resources, have all made the study of geography farmore relevant
than ever. However, it is also important toemphasize that there is
a need for a fundamental change inthe way we teach world
geography.
In conclusion, the contemporary world is linked intoan
international network of transportation and commu-nication. This
has facilitated large-scale movements ofpeople, goods, services,
and information across nationalboundaries with ease. As a major
player in the internationaleconomy and polity, India can ill afford
to keep her citizensgeographically illiterate. On the contrary,
geographicallyliterate citizens with sound knowledge of Indias
geo-graphical variety and plurality as well as that of
differentparts of the world would go a long way in making Indiaa
better place. Well-planned geography education at alllevels will
help to make young minds more aware ofother countries and cultures
and prepare them to take theirplace in the world. Teaching
geography as a part of socialstudies would undermine geographys
educational role.Therefore, its position as an independent subject
must bemaintained.
NOTES1. NCERT is the organization in India that prepares
course curriculum, syllabi, textbooks, and supple-mental reading
material for school from primarylevel to higher secondary level
(class XII).
2. The terms social sciences and social studies are
usedinterchangeably in this article.
3. The Kothari Commission also suggested that Earthsciences
should be introduced in the secondaryschools, geology and geography
being taught asan integrated subject. There are also many areasin
chemistry, physics, and biology in which certainEarth science
topics can naturally be related.
REFERENCESAschmann, H. 1962. Geography in the liberal arts
college.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers 52
(3):284292.
Bednarz, S. 1998. State standards: Implementing ge-ography for
life. Journal of Geography 97 (2): 8389.
Fairgrieve, J. 1926. Geography in School. London: Universityof
London Press.
Gault, T., and C. Weber. 1962. Teachers Question and AnswerBook
on Geography. New London, Connecticut: CroftEducational
Service.
Gritzner, C. 2004. The geographic mental map: Cananyone (really)
teach geography? Journal of Geography103 (1): 4345.
Harvey, D. 2001. Spaces of Capital: Towards a Critical
Geogra-phy. Edinburgh: University Press.
Hudson, B. 1994. Geography in the colonial schools:The classroom
experience in West Indian literature.Geography 79 (4): 322329.
James, P. E. 1967. Introductory geography: Topical orregional.
Journal of Geography 66 (2): 5253.
. 1971. Understanding the significance of differencesfrom place
to place. In On Geography: Selected Writingsof Preston E. James,
ed. D. W. Meinig, pp. 333344. NewYork: Syracuse University
Press.
Johnston, R. J. 1985. To the end of the Earth. In The Futureof
Geography, ed. R. J. Johnston, pp. 326338. London:Methuen.
Kothari Commission. 1966. Report of the Education Commis-sion,
196466. New Delhi, India: Ministry of Education,Government of
India.
Kumar, K. 2005. Political Agenda of Education. 2nd ed. NewDelhi,
India: Sage Publications.
Kumar, P. 1996. Teaching-learning process in geography. InNew
Frontiers in Geography Teaching, ed. L. R. Singh, pp.246253.
Allahabad, India: R. N. Dubey Foundation.
Massey, D. 1999. Geography matters in a globalised
world.Geography 84 (2): 261265.
Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD).1997. Appendix A
agenda papers of the StandingCommittee of the Central Advisory
Board on SchoolEducation (SCCABSE). In Compilation on 50 Years
ofIndian Education: 19471997. Compiled by MHRD, pp.214 297. New
Delhi: Government of India.
National Advisory Committee (Yash Pal Committee). 1993.Learning
Without Burden. New Delhi, India: Ministry ofHuman Resource
Development, Government of India.
National Council of Educational Research and Training(NCERT).
1975. Curriculum for the Ten-Year School: AFramework. New Delhi,
India: NCERT.
. 1988. National Curriculum for Elementary and Sec-ondary
Education: A Framework. Rev. vers. New Delhi,India: NCERT.
. 2000. National Curriculum Framework for SchoolEducation 2000.
New Delhi, India: NCERT.
. 2005. National Curriculum Framework 2005. NewDelhi, India:
NCERT.
Sangwan, S. 1990. Science education in India under
colonialconstraints, 17921857.OxfordReview of Education 16
(1):8195.
Sauer, C. 1956. Education for geographers. Annals ofthe
Association of American Geographers 46 (3): 287299.
249
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
-
Sarfaraz Alam
Secondary Education Commission (Mudaliar Commis-sion).
1953.Report of the Secondary EducationCommission,October 1952June
1953. New Delhi, India: Ministry ofEducation and Social Welfare,
Government of India.
Shirey, R. n.d. The Importance of Geography in theSchool
Curriculum.
http://www.ncge.org/publications/resources/importance/page3.html
(accessed August23, 2006).
Singh, Y. 1973.Modernisation of IndianTradition. Jaipur,
India:Rawat Publications.
Sukhwal, B. 1984. Geography in Indian secondary schools.National
Geographical Journal of India 30 (4): 223230.
Wooldridge, S. W., and W. G. East. 1966. The Spirit andPurpose
of Geography. London: Hutchinson UniversityPress Library.
250
Dow
nloa
ded
by [U
nivers
ity of
Cam
bridg
e] at
16:54
30 O
ctobe
r 201
4
