Content area
Abstract
The writer identified the problem as being that Geography teachers see the Geography syllabus as part of a larger curriculum. This results in excessive emphasis on the subject content alone to achieve completion of the syllabus. Other principles of curriculum design are thus neglected. Neither geographical skills nor educational goals are therefore achieved.
Reasons for teacher's undue stress on learning content are found in factors such as:
(i) A limited academic background in Geography;
(ii) Inadequate didactic and educational schooling with limited knowledge of curriculating principle s I or even
(iii) Teachers ignoring their didactic and educational schooling.
A study of the Literature brought to light an inconsequent application of terminology. Terms such as "syllabus", "curriculum" and "recurriculate" had to be defined for the purpose of this study.
Basically, the function of the teacher's lesson design is one of recurriculating. This means that he must ensure that his Iesson-planning, which is based on the prescribed syllabus , fits in with design principles for curriculating , such as situation, selection of goals, content as learning opportunities and ways and means of evaluation, Special emphasis is placed on the functional coherence of these principles.
The writer of this dissertation hypothesized that the design of lessons in Geography in the senior primary phase docs not comply with generally accepted curriculating standards. The problem which was investigated is whether teachers executed lesson design as a curriculating act or not.
In order to investigate the problem, criteria had to be determined by means of which lesson designs could be evaluated. Applicable criteria are derived from didactic criteria that are founded in original educational criteria.
It was furthermore exemplified that the prescribed syllabus is a useful subject curriculum which enables the teacher to achieve educational goals.
The evaluation was done by applying sixteen predetermined criteria on a positive-negative scale to sixty-three lesson designs. Expressed as a percentage, the positive values were 54,25% of the total, and the negative values 45,75%. The conclusion is therefore made that lesson design in Geography in the senior primary phase complies to the extent of only 54,25% with accepted curriculating requirements.
The writer concluded that teachers do not necessarily teach badly because of the fact that some curriculating principles are neglected. The planning of principles such as the use of media, learning opportunities, pupil participation and evaluation actually drew good scores on the scale.
Curriculating principles which are neglected such as educational goals, situation analysis, formulation of aims, integration of learning content and differentiation must have a negative effect on the role of Geography in the total education of the child.
