JonesLearnUK

Cartography.  The science or practice of drawing maps.  I don’t claim to be any sort of an expert in this, but I do understand maps to be graphical representations. They demonstrate, in a pictorial form, what things are and where they are so people can see and appreciate the landscape on a page. Users can work out how things relate to other things, how to move from one thing to another thing. Planning journeys, making connections and considering ideas of space and time are all made possible. So, this ‘cartographic approach’ (that's what I am calling it anyway!) is how I have decided to progress my curriculum thinking – with a graphic ‘map’ of each subject. A visual representation of the subject that shows how I conceive of the subject landscape and one that will enable me to plan and consider the journeys across the landscape, to identify sensible checkpoints along the way, to appreciate where we might wander back on ourselves, or how to cut across previous paths. A map also al

I’m not afraid to admit it.  I was late to the curriculum party. As a teacher of economics and business, I am very clear on why I teach and I have consumed many delightful hours considering exactly how I will teach, but I have dedicated very little time to deeply considering what I teach or when I teach it. Teachers of history, English, art or various other subjects, who must begin their planning by deciding which texts, which eras, which artists or which ‘something else’s’ to study from a choice of many may be quite confused on hearing this statement. I cannot emphasise enough though how dominant I have found the content of the exam board specifications in influencing my ideas on what I teach in particular, and also on when . And I don’t think I’m alone. Curriculum vs Specification Mary Myatt (2018) is clear in her excellent book ‘The Curriculum: Gallimaufry to Coherence’ about the relationship between the National Curriculum and the actual curriculum you adopt and deliver.