Guidelines for teaching about other countries

 

A Checklist for planning to teach about other places

	What exactly am I hoping that the children will learn? How much do I have to know about the economic situation, basic geography, religion, languages, issues relating to minority groups etc., beyond that which I'll be actually using in the classroom?
	How can I take my own understanding of the country further?
	How would I justify this work to myself/to colleagues on educational grounds?
	Can I anticipate the children's immediate reactions to images? Do I know the images they already hold? How am I going to respond?
	How far do the materials I have represent the views and images the people hold about themselves and their country?
	How am I going to teach about this place in a way that will enable the children to identify with people's experiences?
	Am I primarily teaching about the people or the place?
	What are my images of the place/people? Are they fixed images? Where do they come from?
	If I have visited this country, what are the limitations of my experience?
	How comfortable would I feel if a teacher from this country were a "fly on the wall" in my classroom?
	How far should I follow the interests of the children rather than stick to my original plan? In following their interest, is there a danger of reinforcing their stereotypes?
	What oversimplifications have I made? Can I justify these?
	Does what I have planned address important ordinary life experiences and social issues, as opposed to only addressing "exotic culture"?

There are some approaches to avoid when you teach about other countries.

• The tourist-eye view

  Is everything portrayed as quaint and curious? Are the local community or members of your class used merely as audio-visual aids for a project on the country they originate from?

• The packet-of-tea approach

  Are people from other countries shown as existing to grow things or provide exciting holidays for people in your country? Is it implied that this is a very convenient arrangement that satisfies people on both sides?

• The pathological view

  Is everything in another country shown as absolutely desperate: people everywhere are dying of starvation, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes? Are people from your country shown as the only ones able to rescue others from such disaster?

• The pat on the head

  Is it implied that people from other countries have been a bit behind, but that if they follow the example of your country they will come out all right in the end? Is it implied that high technology, fast cars, automated industry, are the things that make a country developed?

   

• Poverty as an act of God

  Is poverty treated as something that is simply there, though deplorable? Are some of the fundamental causes of poverty described, or only its symptoms?

• And here are some useful approaches to look out for:
  • Are there strong role models of people from the country making their own decisions?
  • Are customs and traditions presented in a way which explains their meaning from the point of view of the people involved?
  • Are family relationships shown in a supportive way?
  • Is there an emphasis on local people who speak for themselves?
  • Are controversial issues included?
  • Are people's efforts to win freedom for themselves seen as valid?
  • Are there good quality illustrations or photos, preferably produced by people from the country?
  • Is there an emphasis on day to day life rather than the exotic or unusual?