Fieldwork has been described as a cornerstone pedagogy in geography education (France & Haigh 2018). An important part of educating new generations of geographers takes place outside the lecture halls. Walking tours, bus excursions, and field observations offer students opportunities to learn through first-hand experience of the field, to combine theory and practice, to observe real world places and issues alongside textbook examples. But, to what extent are fieldwork teaching practices and traditions in human geography in line with current ambitions to make higher education institutions more ethical and inclusive?

Ethical concerns include, for example, field visits to urban areas that already experience tourist overcrowding, perpetuating unequal power relations between fieldwork participants and ‘the researched’, and gazing at places that experience over research (Neal et al 2016). Additionally, awareness is needed for the many ways in which fieldwork can exclude students, from neurodivergent students being away from their routine to BAME or queer students who are at higher risk of harm in certain places or activities (Hughes 2016, Lawrence & Dowey 2022).

This session invites papers that address these issues and attempt to future proof geography fieldwork in Higher Education. The focus of the session will be on human geography in particular. While the conversation about the need for more inclusive and ethical fieldwork has gained momentum in the broader fields of geosciences and physical geography (see for example Stokes et al 2019; Mol & Atchinson 2019, Kingsbury et al 2020), there has been a relative silence with regards to human geography fieldwork since the first calls to action in the early 2000’s (Hall et al 2002; Nairn 2003). We welcome contributions focusing on new theories, pedagogies and fieldwork practices – including application of Universal Design for Learning in fieldwork design, challenges and opportunities around Gen Z students’ way of learning, using new technologies such as VR, or navigating institutional cultures around fieldwork traditions.

References:

France, D. & Haigh, M. (2018) Fieldwork @40: fieldwork in geography higher education, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42(4), 498-514

Hall, T., Healey, M. & Harrison, M. (2002) Fieldwork and disabled students: discourses of exclusion and inclusion, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 27(2), 213-231

Hughes, A. (2016) Exploring normative whiteness: ensuring inclusive pedagogic practice in undergraduate fieldwork teaching and learning, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 40(3), 460-477

Kingsbury, C., Sibert, E., Killingback, Z. & Atchinson, C. (2020) “Nothing about us without us” The perspectives of autistic geoscientists on inclusive instructional practices in geoscience education, Journal of Geoscience Education, 68(4), 302-310

Lawrence, A. & Dowey, N. (2022) Six simple steps towards making GEES fieldwork more accessible and inclusive, Area, 54(1), 52-59

Mol, L. & Atchison, C. (2019) Image is everything: educator awareness of perceived barriers for students with physical disabilities in geoscience degree programs, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 43(4), 544-567

Nairn, K. (2003) What has the geography of sleeping arrangements got to do with the geography of our teaching spaces?, Gender, Place, Culture, 10(1), 67-81

Neal, S., Mohan, G., Cochrane, A., and Bennett, K. (2016) ‘You can’t move in Hackney without bumping into an anthropologist’: Why certain places attract research attention. Qualitative Research, 16 (5), 491–507.

Stokes, A., Feig, A., Atchison, C. & Gilley, B. (2019) Making geoscience fieldwork inclusive and accessible for students with disabilities: Geosphere, 15(6), 1809–1825