Geography education stands at a critical crossroads, as recent research highlights significant shortcomings in the way this essential subject is taught across the globe. Hilde Storrøsæter, a geographer and assistant professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, together with an international team, has conducted an in-depth analysis of geography curricula in upper secondary schools across nine countries. Their findings reveal troubling gaps that jeopardize students’ ability to comprehend complex global challenges through geographical thinking—a foundational element that surprisingly remains undefined in most national curricula.
At its core, geographical thinking is more than memorizing locations or physical features—it is an analytical framework that enables learners to understand and interpret the intricate relationships between places, people, environments, and societal development. Storrøsæter emphasizes that this way of thinking is crucial for grappling with pressing contemporary issues such as climate change, globalization, and resource management. The absence of clear definitions and educational strategies for this form of thinking leaves students ill-equipped to synthesize diverse information into coherent understandings of the world’s dynamic systems.
One of the most alarming findings centered around the concept of “place,” often regarded by geographers as a fundamental pillar of geographical knowledge. Contrary to expectations, place-based thinking receives minimal attention within the curricula of the countries studied, including Australia, China, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Norway, Slovakia, South Africa, and the United States. This neglect represents a critical deficiency because place-based insights ground abstract geographical concepts in tangible human and environmental contexts, nurturing empathy, cultural awareness, and spatial reasoning.
The study, published in the International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education journal on June 6, 2025, offers a comprehensive survey method that scrutinizes the presence and articulation of key learning objectives linked to geographical thinking across the different national curricula. While it does not measure the extent or effectiveness of curriculum implementation, it serves as a vital diagnostic tool signaling where reforms are urgently needed. Notably, the study finds that curricula from countries like France are comparatively rigid, blending history and geography under a single framework dominated by history teachers. Conversely, Norway and Denmark exhibit more flexible, open-ended goals, facilitating interpretive teaching but facing challenges in clear academic guidance.
The role of geography as a bridge connecting natural and social sciences is another dimension highlighted by Storrøsæter. She argues that geography alone synthesizes these domains, creating an integrated understanding of human impact on the environment and the reciprocal influences between society and nature. This synthesis is increasingly necessary in a world facing urgent sustainability crises, biodiversity loss, and societal upheavals exemplified by political events like Brexit and electoral shifts in the United States. Geographical literacy can illuminate how these phenomena emerge from local environmental exploitation and broader systemic transformations.
However, a significant void within these curricula is the absence of cultivating “ways of thinking,” such as creative, future-oriented, and metacognitive processes. These cognitive skills enable students not only to acquire knowledge but also to question, analyze, and anticipate complex scenarios critically. Without fostering these thinking modes, geography education risks devolving into rote memorization of facts disconnected from real-life relevance. Storrøsæter cautions that when curricula omit these dimensions, the holistic purpose of education is compromised, leaving learners poorly prepared for lifelong learning and civic engagement.
Central to these concerns is the practical challenge faced by educators working with narrow and sometimes vague curricular frameworks. In Norway, for example, geography instruction is constrained by limited weekly hours and a shortage of qualified teachers who specialize in the subject. Storrøsæter, bringing nearly a decade of teaching experience, underscores the implications of this situation: students enter secondary education with declining prior knowledge, while educators lacking subject expertise struggle to enact meaningful learning experiences. Consequently, teaching often becomes superficial, focusing on facts rather than nurturing sophisticated understanding and analytical skills.
Moreover, Storrøsæter draws attention to the necessity of connecting students’ personal decisions with global contexts and long-term consequences. An illustrative example involves plastic pollution—when a student buys bottled water, they must learn to see beyond convenience and understand the embedded environmental costs of plastic production and waste. This geographical lens empowers young people to evaluate how local actions ripple through planetary systems, fostering responsible citizenship and sustainable behavior.
The research team’s comparative approach also sheds light on how political, cultural, and educational structures influence curriculum design. For instance, geography in Denmark is treated primarily as a science subject, which affects the inclusion of thinking competencies differently than in the more historically oriented models of France. Furthermore, evidence shows that countries like Australia and China have notable gaps in clearly articulated objectives related to ways of thinking, pointing to a global pattern of curricular insufficiencies in preparing students for future challenges.
Ultimately, the study advocates for more precise, ambitious, and practical geography curricula that empower educators and students alike. This is not a call for homogenized global standards but for shared ambitions—to deepen geography’s connection to critical topics like sustainability, citizenship, and community development. By prioritizing the development of thinkers rather than mere fact-learners, education systems can equip young people with the cognitive tools needed to navigate and influence an increasingly complex world.
As geography faces institutional pressures worldwide—from reduced instructional time to constrained teacher expertise—the findings of Storrøsæter and colleagues serve as a wake-up call for educational policymakers and stakeholders. The path forward requires integrating geographical thinking explicitly into curricula, supporting teacher education, and providing resources that enable dynamic, thoughtful, and contextually rich teaching. In doing so, geography can reclaim its pivotal role in fostering informed, capable global citizens ready to confront the multifaceted problems of the 21st century.
The future of geography education hinges on embracing innovative pedagogies that meld content knowledge with critical thinking, creativity, and metacognition. Without this transformation, the risk is that geography becomes sidelined, and students lose access to the intellectual frameworks essential for understanding the complex interplay of human and environmental dynamics. Through purposeful curriculum reform and robust teacher support, geographical thinking can become the compass guiding young learners toward meaningful engagement with their world.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: An international perspective on geography curricula: paving a way forward for geographical thinking
News Publication Date: 6 June 2025
Web References:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10382046.2025.2513535?mi=3fqos0
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2025.2513535
References:
Tomáš Bendl, Hilde Storrøsæter, Lene Møller Madsen, David Trokšiar, Raphaële de la Martinière, Shanshan Liu, Sizakele Serame, Jerry T. Mitchell, Péter Bagoly-Simó, Yushan Duan, Gillian Kidman: “An international perspective on geography curricula: paving a way forward for geographical thinking,” International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 6 June 2025.
Image Credits: Sølvi W. Normannsen/NTNU
Keywords: Geography education, curricular analysis, geographical thinking, upper secondary education, teacher shortage, sustainability education, metacognition, place concept, comparative education, educational policy
