We often are told that 'Geography matters'. This paper - which comes from the British school of Geography Education, argues for a political theory of the curriculum 'political theory of the curriculum' and explores how this might be understood in three national traditions - the UK, New Zealand, and the United States. These cases indicate that the representation of national space in geography teaching is always open to contestation, and that geography teachers are involved in acts of cultural critique. The concluding part of the paper identifies some common features and speculates on the implications for teacher development in geography.

This article will sets the current ‘crisis’ of universities in New Zealand in its recent historical context. It discusses the past, present and futures of the capitalist university. It starts by describing a university system geared to the production of an intellectual elite financed by the state through grants and subsidies. Looking back in 2025, that feels like another world. Universities have been reshaped by the market and business culture, variously termed the ‘neoliberal’ or ‘managerial’ university’. The implications of the global financial crisis of 2007-08 are still being played out. It may be that the ‘crisis’ of neoliberalism or the ‘end’ of the neoliberal order will usher in ‘another university’. It may be too early to tell. The paper thus attempts to locate the capitalist university within the long-waves of capitalism. It uses the University of Auckland as a ‘case study’ in change. Uncertain times for New Zealand are reflected in its largest university.

This article spotlights the Geographical Association's publication Geography for all our futures (GA, 2024). The article examines the assumptions about a changing economy that underpin the document and the vision of geography it offers. The article suggests that a wider framework that draws upon different forms of geographical knowledge can offer a more critically engaged and relevant school geography in the present conjuncture.

This short paper provides a personal commentary on the state of Educational Studies in University Faculty of Education. It suggests that the social mandate of universities to talk authoritatively about issues of schooling, teaching and learning is increasingly challenged.

In this paper, we connect with Martin Thrupp’s calls for class-based analysis in education policy by problematising the absence of social class in the refreshed New Zealand curriculum, Te Mātaiaho (2023). To contextualise this absence, we locate this curriculum policy in a historical perspective and interpret its ‘identity turn’ as an expression of what philosopher Nancy Fraser calls ‘progressive neoliberalism’. We conclude our contribution with a reflection on the reactionary neoliberal response of the current National-led government and a call for educational researchers in Aotearoa New Zealand to more seriously consider social class in their analyses.

This short paper provides a personal commentary on the state of Educational Studies in University Faculty of Education. It suggests that the social mandate of universities to talk authoritatively about issues of schooling, teaching and learning is increasingly challenged.

How geography teachers can respond to racism has become an important theme in geography in recent years. This short article provides important context and background.

We prove existence of equilibrium in a generalized version of the canonical New Trade model à la Krugman (1979, 1980)---a result missing from the literature.

School geography tends to be conservative, teaching models of social and environmental relations that support the status quo. However, since the early 1980s, John Huckle has been a principled critic of dominant approaches to school geography, arguing for an eco-socialist perspective that can help students and teachers confront the ecological crisis. This chapter engages with this approach, arguing that the key task for any eco-socialist school geography is to provide students with an analysis of the role that capitalism plays in the social production of nature.

This chapter poses the question of what sort of mentors are needed for what sort of education. Situated within a critical human geography, it suggests that the answer to that question requires that we have an analysis of the contemporary world. The chapter suggests that, at present, geography teachers face a triple crisis of environment, economy and social division. These crises have been developing for some time, but research in geography education has largely ignored them, instead focussing on more 'practical' aspects of teachers;' work. The chapter asserts that this is no longer sustainable, and sets out a tentative 'typology' of mentoring approaches for readers' consideration. This raises questions about what it means to mentor geography teachers, to help them to 'persevere with geography' in professional contexts where there is a pressure (sometimes subtle, sometimes not) to adopt generic and pedagogical fixes in classrooms. The chapter argues that the role of the geography educator is to find ways to represent and understand the ways the world works. This will require a sustained engagement with theory. It takes its cue from a comment from David Harvey that: 'It has always seemed to me to be the role of the educational theorist or teaching-college geographer to grapple with this problem in all its complexity' (Harvey, 1972, p. 37). Examples are offered of how Harvey's writings about capital and capitalism can provide a model of intellectual development that can underpin geography teachers' work.

Abstract In September 2020, the Centre for Informed Futures (Koi Tū) attributed the success of New Zealand's response to the great lockdown of March 2020 as a triumph of social cohesiveness. In this commentary we examine the use of terms such as ‘society’, ‘resilience’, ‘nation’ and ‘social cohesion’ in the light of the spread of the Delta variant, and the importance of geography and politics. We conclude that there is a need for a critical engagement with widely touted ideas of social cohesion.

The idea for this article came to us after the publication of Chris McDowall and Tim Denee's We are here: An atlas of Aotearoa (Massey University Press, 2019). Little did we know that, a few months later, that title would take on a whole other meaning: as we write, WE ARE HERE-due to the COVID-19 pandemic, New Zealand's borders are closed and the nation's links to the world outside are uncertain. Two periods of lockdown (for those who live in Auckland) have prompted further reflection on both who the 'we' are and what is the nature of the 'here'. Taking McDowall and Denee's (2019) atlas as our starting point, we inquire into the 'geographical imagination' that informs their work and set it in the context of other visualisations of the national space found in the work of mid-20th century geographers. We suggest that these imaginative mappings became increasingly anachronistic in the light of in the light of rapid economic, social, and cultural changes in the last quarter of the 20th century. McDowall and Denee's (2019) atlas provides a thought-provoking representation of the national space on the eve of the COVID-19 pandemic. But that space is both a national one and one that risks confirming the stereotype of New Zealand as being at the ends of the earth. To counter this, we suggest its national geographical imaginations need to be set within the larger frameworks of global cartography and the intellectual problem of 'the nation' itself. The final section of the article juxtaposes We are here with three attempts to provide new maps for an island planet published in the1970s. The intention is not to critique but to jar us all into deeper reflection.

In the context of Krugman's (1979) canonical New Trade model, we show that a country is better off in autarky than in free and costless trade if its trading partner's marginal cost sufficiently exceeds its own. The initiation of trade hurts both countries. This also holds on a sector by sector basis, irrespective of the overall distance to autarky. We derive the lowest import tariffs that guarantee that countries gain from trade. As an aside, we prove existence of equilibrium in the (generalized) Krugman model---a result missing from the literature.

The Curriculum JournalVolume 30, Issue 2 p. 99-104 EditorialFree to Read After the knowledge turn? Politics and pedagogy Ursula Hoadley, Corresponding Author Ursula Hoadley [email protected] University of Cape Town, South Africa[email protected]Search for more papers by this authorAlka Sehgal-Cuthbert, Alka Sehgal-Cuthbert Independent scholarSearch for more papers by this authorBrian Barrett, Brian Barrett State University of New York College at CortlandSearch for more papers by this authorJohn Morgan, John Morgan Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Auckland, New ZealandSearch for more papers by this author Ursula Hoadley, Corresponding Author Ursula Hoadley [email protected] University of Cape Town, South Africa[email protected]Search for more papers by this authorAlka Sehgal-Cuthbert, Alka Sehgal-Cuthbert Independent scholarSearch for more papers by this authorBrian Barrett, Brian Barrett State University of New York College at CortlandSearch for more papers by this authorJohn Morgan, John Morgan Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Auckland, New ZealandSearch for more papers by this author First published: 03 April 2019 https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2019.1601844Citations: 4Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume30, Issue2Special Issue: After the knowledge turn? Politics and pedagogyJune 2019Pages 99-104 RelatedInformation

This paper suggests that advocates of the 'knowledge turn' have been united in their opposition to Young and Muller's (2010) Future 2, but that this 'union' has masked very different views of the relations between Young and Muller's Future 1 and Future 3. Whereas some who subscribe to the 'turn' see a 'weak boundary' between Futures 1 and 3 (and therefore consider them similar), others construe these Futures as very different and strongly bounded. We argue that these positions are often underpinned by irreconcilable political persuasions and conceptions of education, society and the curriculum. In order to illustrate the argument, we discuss the political project of the UK-based Academy of Ideas, many of whose members have been involved in advocating implicitly or explicitly for a weak boundary between Futures 1 and 3. This position is then contrasted with those in the UK who are more strongly committed to exploring a distinctive Future 3, and the situation in South Africa, where the tensions between different educational Futures are acutely visible due to the social, cultural and political context and academic and policy debates around the curriculum. We conclude with some implications of our arguments for the Future 3 principles of disciplinarity and sociality.

Since the global financial crisis of 2007-08 the question of the aims of schooling have assumed greater importance. There has been no 'return to normal', yet young people are encouraged to 'Keep calm and go to university'. Culture and the Political Economy of Schooling explores the possibilities for the emergence of a progressive agenda for schooling. Culture and the Political Economy of Schooling provides educators and social scientists with the essential background required to understand changes in schooling since the Second World War. It introduces theories of the economic crisis, and explores their educational implications, before going on to provide accounts of how politics and culture have shaped debates about schooling. This cultural political economy approach is applied to issues such as social class, race, the brave new worlds of work, the dangerous rise of creative education, and the increasingly urgent question of inequality. The final parts of the book explore the educational challenges of the Anthropocene and the changing conceptions of knowledge in schools and finally consider alternatives to contemporary schooling. The students in our schools today will face a future framed by the twin crises of economy and environment, prompting an urgent rethink of education. Written in an accessible and engaging manner, this book is an essential guide for thinking about the past, present and futures of education. It will be of great interest to researchers and graduate students of education studies, curriculum studies, sociology of education, education politics and education policy.