Area (2006) 38.

4, 413420

Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Geography fieldwork in a risk society

Victoria A Cook, Deborah Phillips and Joseph Holden
School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT Email: v.a.cook04@leeds.ac.uk Revised manuscript received 15 July 2006 The recent decline in fieldwork provision in UK schools has partly been attributed to false perceptions of risk among teachers. This paper examines a case study based on geography teachers perceptions from six state secondary schools in a northern English city. The research shows that owing to the inherent subjectivity of risk perception, these teachers perceptions of fieldwork risk cannot be dismissed as false. Furthermore, it is argued that owing to the implicit, but powerful, spatialities of teachers imaginations of fieldwork, these teachers will first need to re-evaluate the role and value of fieldwork before they are willing to re-enter the field. Key words: UK, fieldwork, geography, risk, perception, qualitative

Introduction
It is widely recognized that fieldwork has always been central to the enterprise and imaginary of geography (Bracken and Mawdsley 2004, 280), in particular through its links with the exploratory tradition (e.g. Stoddart 1986; Driver 2001). Sauers assertion that the principal training of the geographer should come, wherever possible, by doing field work (1956, 296) is a reflection of the importance traditionally attached to fieldwork within all levels of the discipline, including geography taught in schools. In British schools in particular, fieldwork has a long tradition as an established component of geography education (Lambert and Balderstone 2000, 26). Fieldwork is a potentially very important learning and teaching method in schools. Fieldwork provides an important means by which students may engage with a particular subject and therefore choose to study it further; this is especially significant in the UK where geography is optional for 1416-year-olds. As Dalton argued,
it has been traditional for higher education institutions to exploit the enthusiasms generated through field study both pre-entry and during year/stage 1 as important planks in the platform for subsequent

successful development of undergraduate geographical studies. (2001, 391)

Aside from engagement, fieldwork also has the ability to appeal to a range of different learning styles (Geographical Association 2005), which enables students to develop a wide range of learning skills. Hall et al. (2002) have argued that teachers frequently cite more general reasons for doing fieldwork, such as its ability to help develop skills in observation, analysis and team work. Fieldwork can also facilitate more relaxed social contact between students and their peers and between students and staff. Students are able to learn how to take responsibility for their own learning while getting the opportunity to experience real research and visit places they would not normally experience. In addition, fieldworks focus on the real world, in which a real life example can be compared with idealized examples in textbooks, can help to develop a respect for the environment and facilitate experiential learning. Despite the fact that some of these educational objectives can be achieved through other means of teaching, they argue that it is the combination of them that makes fieldwork a potentially effective method of learning (Hall et al. 2002, 214). However, despite the educational benefits of fieldwork, in recent years teachers in the UK have

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

414 Cook et al. become increasingly reluctant to take to the field. A report by the Education and Skills Committee (2005) into education outside the classroom found that many schools were deterred by
the false perception that a high degree of risk attaches to outdoor education as well as by cumbersome bureaucracy and issues of funding, time and resources. (2005, 3)

1998, 2), to the second phase of modernity. This second phase is characterized by insecurity and doubt following the realization that unexpected results may be the consequence of our decisions, and not simply an aspect of cosmology, an expression of the hidden meaning of nature or . . . God (Luhmann 1988, 96).

Research methodology
The research focuses on how individual teachers make decisions about whether to undertake fieldwork with secondary school students and the external pressures which constrain their behaviour. Although this paper focuses on the actions of individual teachers, it is acknowledged that teachers powers are constrained by the ethos, policy and practices in their particular school and that, in turn, individual schools are embedded within the wider structures of the educational system in England, as embodied in the policies of the Local Education Authority and the Department for Education and Skills. All will make decisions within the context of an increasingly publicly accountable and risk averse society. Semi-structured in-depth interviews, each lasting about 3040 minutes, were undertaken to explore how the role and value of geography fieldwork in secondary schools was perceived by geography teachers working in six inner-city schools, to assess what factors affected the provision of geography fieldwork in those schools, and to examine what geography teachers think the future holds for geography fieldwork in the secondary school curriculum. The study assessed the teachers perceptions of the value of fieldwork through a general discussion about why fieldwork was undertaken in each of the schools. This provided insights into the teachers opinions on the utility of fieldwork as a teaching and learning tool for their students while also allowing individual teachers to talk at length about their own experiences. Ten geography teachers from the six inner-city state schools in a city in northern England were interviewed between May and June 2005. The interviewees teaching experience ranged from four to 35 years. Five of the schools were community schools (where the Local Education Authority retains overall responsibility for health and safety on fieldwork) and one was voluntary-aided (and so this responsibility falls to the governing body). The geography departments in these schools tended to be quite small, with three schools containing only one

The same report acknowledged that many countries, both in Europe and elsewhere, achieve a significantly higher level of outdoor learning in their schools than the UK (Education and Skills Committee 2005, 8). In particular, the report referred to evidence given by Dr Peter Higgins of the Outdoor and Environmental Education Section, University of Edinburgh, in which he cited Australia, Norway and Canada as examples of good practice. In the context of declining fieldwork provision in the UK, this paper will present evidence of the experiences and perceptions of geography teachers from six inner-city state secondary schools from a city in northern England and, in doing so, will contribute to an enhanced understanding of the concept of a risk society. Specifically, this paper aims to explore teachers perceptions of the role and value of fieldwork, to assess what factors affected the provision of geography fieldwork in secondary schools and to examine what geography teachers think the future holds for fieldwork in the secondary school curriculum. The concept of a risk society is important to our understanding of the decisions and experiences of individual teachers working within UK schools today. It is widely accepted that risk is not new; [t]here has always been a contingent edge to life. What has changed is the nature of risk (Franklin 1998, 1). Giddens has argued that many of the uncertainties which face us today have been created by the very growth of human knowledge (1994, 185). Rather than becoming more certain about the world, we have, in fact, become less certain as a range of possible future outcomes are envisaged, some of which entail the possibility of catastrophe (Giddens 1994). Beck defined risk as a systematic way of dealing with hazards and insecurities induced and introduced by modernisation itself (1992, 21). For Beck and Giddens, this change in the nature of risk is the result of the transition from the first phase of modernity, characterised by industrialisation and the drive to conquer the natural world (Franklin

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

Geography fieldwork in a risk society 415 geography teacher. However, this provided useful insights into the provision of geography fieldwork in schools in which geography was a relatively marginal subject. The schools tended to have an ethnically diverse intake from relatively disadvantaged communities and their attainment was generally below the national average. The names of the six schools have been replaced with pseudonyms to respect the confidentiality of the interviewees and schools. Stage 3; however, the geography teachers did not have false perceptions of the risk of accidents happening while undertaking fieldwork. Rather, they were wary of the risk of litigation:
they cannot guarantee that you wont be prosecuted if anything goes wrong. And the amount of times things will go wrong are very, very tiny. But quite frankly I dont want to spend five years in jail for a kid not doing as theyre told. (Ashgate School, geography teacher: 20s)

Fieldwork provision in the six schools

Fieldwork provision had declined over the years at four of the six schools (Ashgate, Bramley, Grange and Rushton Schools), where very little or no geography fieldwork was undertaken at Key Stage 3 (1114 years). The only fieldwork that was regularly undertaken was at Key Stage 4 (GCSE) when Ashgate, Grange and Rushton Schools had to meet the requirements of their examination specifications (GCSE geography was not offered at Bramley School). Only Clifford and Walton Schools offered AS and A2 level geography; both these schools organized fieldwork at AS (1617 years), while only Clifford School organized fieldwork at A2 (1718 years). Within each department, the decision on whether or not to undertake fieldwork was highly circumscribed by the interaction of internal and external structures, which can be organized around five main themes: risk, student behaviour, cost, social inclusion and red tape. There was a pervasive awareness of risk among the teachers. Fieldwork planners in this locality are expected to be fully conversant with the guidance book issued by their Local Education Authority which stands at over 350 pages. Covering issues such as health and safety and the completion of risk assessments, this guidance exemplifies how notions of risk following a local fatality have become enshrined in local policy. This awareness of risk was overshadowing fieldworks integral role within geography, which was recognized by four teachers:
It should be the basis of a lot of what you do in geography. But in this situation with the students that we have in this school who are very difficult to handle at times its a bit dangerous to take the students and walk them up to the top of Malham Cove. (Rushton School, head of geography: 40s)

Teachers perception of the risk of litigation was itself linked to worries about poor student behaviour, coupled with teachers perception of a compensation culture:
We used to take Year 7s to Malham village and do a little survey around the village . . . and the end came when we had three or four kids running around and banging on peoples doors and running away. And I thought this isnt worth the hassle anymore. So we knocked it on the head. (Rushton School, head of geography: 40s)

Even at Clifford School, which did the second largest amount of fieldwork, student behaviour was cited as the reason why fieldwork was not undertaken during Year 9; instead, the students were contained within the classroom until the end of the year:
Year 9. Troublesome year group. Theyre not easy to manage from a behavioural point of view. Not just here but generally. So what we do there is pin them down in the classroom most of the time. But at the end of the year those students that have chosen to do Geography at GCSE . . . we take that group to Flamborough Head in the summer term . . . its an incentive to do geography. (Clifford School, senior geography teacher: 40s)

The issue of poor student behaviour also affected teachers perceptions about the future of fieldwork. Most geography teachers were pessimistic about the future; five teachers thought that geography fieldwork would decline in either quantity or quality, as fieldwork is increasingly replaced with more passive fieldtrips to museums and similar venues. This decline was partly attributed to teachers desire to minimize the risk of litigation:
I would hope that in most schools that people do base what they do on fieldwork. Or not all, but an element each year on some fieldwork . . . but with the litigious

Risk was perceived to be an important structural constraint influencing fieldwork provision at Key

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

416 Cook et al.

nature of modern society and the way some students now are just so difficult to deal with . . . I take lots of students out of school. All the careers things theyre all to meetings or conferences or exhibitions or whatever that are enclosed. You put them on a bus, dump them off . . . where they wander round the building or they go and listen to a lecture and you come back on the bus and you bring them here. Its like a captive audience. Taking students to Filey Bridge or Malham Cove is a different kettle of fish. (Rushton School, head of geography: 40s)

Fieldworks role in facilitating social inclusion was widely championed by the geography teachers from five of the schools, but the issue of poor student behaviour was undermining this role at Rushton and Ashgate Schools, where unruly students were excluded from fieldwork:
[Q]uite a lot of our children here are quite poorly behaved. And when we do do the local urban study there are certain children that we cant take. And it does affect your whole planning. (Ashgate School, geography teacher: 20s)

Cost was another factor inhibiting the provision of fieldwork in four of the schools:
The other thing as well for this area is cost is an implication because quite a lot of kids come from quite deprived backgrounds so they dont have a lot of money and obviously we as a school cant bail everybody out. (Ashgate School, geography teacher: 20s)

Cost was particularly important in Grange and Rushton Schools, which have each had only one specialist geography teacher for several years. With geography in such a marginal position in these schools it is perhaps hardly surprising that fieldwork provision has declined, especially since responsibility for the successful organization and implementation of fieldwork invariably rests with one geography teacher. Both the issues of cost and behaviour had important knock-on effects for social inclusion. It was frequently recognized that the students from these inner-city schools stood to gain a lot from the opportunity to experience different environments. However, many of these students were also from families for whom the cost of fieldwork was prohibitive. This may mean that they opt out of fieldwork, which compounds their already limited experience of different geographical spaces:
These kids have a very small social space . . . the kids also have a very limited idea of places. I think when you take them to somewhere like Flamborough Head the awe of the environment there. Theyre just gobsmacked. Theyve just never seen that before. And the parents dont necessarily take them to these places. Even know about these places. Ive had Sixth formers who get to Flamborough Head and they will pick up a chunk of flint and ask can I take this home?. And the Sixth Formers will proceed to carry that chunk of flint around for the rest of the day because they are just gobsmacked by it. (Bramley School, geography teacher: 40s)

Seven teachers at Clifford, Ashgate, Bramley and Rushton Schools described how the large amount of work involved in the completion of risk assessments and parental consent forms was making them reluctant to organize more fieldwork. Partly as a result of this red tape, the large amount of planning involved was deterring five of the schools from organizing more fieldwork. The teachers desire to avoid the red tape involved with planning fieldwork also contributed to their generally pessimistic perceptions about the future of geography fieldwork. However, this was not the case at Walton School, where the head of geography acknowledged the large amount of planning required, but because he recognized the greatest worth of fieldwork as a teaching and learning tool he did not view this as a constraining factor:
Id say in general the kids will gain an awful lot more being there. Seeing things. And doing something and actually being there rather than just reading about it on the Internet or whatever. I read a statistic somewhere. I cant remember all the numbers . . . So many percent of kids learn things from seeing. Some learn things through doing. Kinaesthetic, audio and visual learners. On a fieldtrip they are doing all three at once. (Walton School, head of department: 20s)

This teacher from Walton School was the only one to recognize the role of fieldwork in appealing to different learning styles. Rather, the more common roles that were recognized were fieldworks role in teaching key skills and contextualizing the students learning. Teachers assessments of the perceived and actual structural constraints influencing fieldwork were affected by their perceptions of the role and value of geography fieldwork. Those who valued fieldwork the least and envisaged a more restricted role for fieldwork were more likely to perceive the risk of litigation, cost and red tape as constraints; conse-

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

Geography fieldwork in a risk society 417 quently they were also more likely to circumvent the external structure provided by the National Curriculum and undertake little or no fieldwork at Key Stage 3. However, those who valued fieldwork the most highly and recognized a wider range of different roles for fieldwork were the most committed to the fieldwork planning process. Thus it was only at Walton and Clifford Schools, the two schools that organized the widest range of fieldwork at Key Stage 3, that fieldwork was valued as part of the departmental culture:
Its my job. Im just following on basically from the head of geography when I was a newly qualified teacher. And he just kind of taught me an awful lot of what I know and Im just following in his footsteps. Thats the way I see it. And I suppose I feel like I have to for the kids sake. Id let them down if I didnt. Obligated. Thats the word. (Walton School, head of department: 20s)

The nature of school fieldwork

Job has argued that geography fieldwork in schools has changed in response to changing paradigms in the subject as well as new thinking in pedagogy and ideas concerning the nature of learning (1996, 35). Consequently fieldwork today can take on a variety of forms, ranging from more teacher-led activities to heuristic, pupil-centred approaches (1996, 33). The quantitative revolution of the 1970s helped to fuel significant changes within geographical fieldwork, which increasingly began to involve more active learning as hypothesis testing gained popularity. This replaced the traditional passive learning students encountered on fieldwork. During this period of change, critics were keen to highlight the difference between field-work and a field-trip. Woodcock and Bailey were two such critics; they argued that a field-trip relies primarily on descriptive explanations and is an inadequate substitute for real field-work, which involves the measurement and analysis of relevant aspects of information (1978, 3). This positivist-based approach to geography fieldwork has been challenged in recent years by a more humanist-oriented approach that utilizes qualitative techniques. For example, fieldwork that encourages an appreciation of awe and wonder is designed to encourage students to develop aesthetic responses to the world around them (Ross 2001, 86). However, findings from our research suggest that wider societal influences that extend beyond academia are affecting the development of geo-

graphical fieldwork today, in particular changing perceptions about the nature of risk. Thus many teachers predicted a rise in the number of teacherled fieldtrips to controlled environments in response to the perceived risk of litigation influenced largely by concerns over student behaviour. Given the evidence which suggests that childrens independent use of public space in England is declining (OBrien et al. 2000; Thomas and Thompson 2004; Valentine 2004; Woolley 2006), this predicted decline in geographical fieldwork is especially concerning. Such research demonstrates that children are not independent agents, free to experience different environments as they so wish; power relations therefore underlie childrens experiences of different environments (Sibley 1995). Many of the teachers in this study valued direct experience of the real world as a pedagogical device, something which is equally as valorized in universities (Hall et al. 2002). This privileging of direct experience is connected to the metaphor of discovery that typically underlies geographical fieldwork (Nairn 2002). The responses of students from Bramley School on seeing the natural features of the coast suggest that fieldwork may be a potentially emancipatory experience for some students, providing valuable opportunities for students to experience an environment first hand. However, the power relations inherent in the educational setting mean that the decision of when and where to take students out of school is invariably out of students hands. Thus the extent to which such fieldwork could continue to be justified in an increasingly risk-aware society was strongly questioned by some of these teachers, which has significant implications for those children who have otherwise limited opportunities to experience different geographical environments.

Fieldwork in a risk society

Evidence suggests that risk is a pervasive concern among teachers in the UK. A report on education outside the classroom concluded:
Many of the organisations and individuals who submitted evidence to our inquiry cited the fear of accidents and the possibility of litigation as one of the main reasons for the apparent decline in school trips. It is the view of this Committee that this fear is entirely out of proportion to the real risks. High-profile reporting of isolated incidents and some tabloid journalism misrepresents the incidence of serious accidents on school trips, which is actually very low indeed. (Education and Skills Committee 2005, 11)

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

418 Cook et al. The probability of a fatal accident on a school trip in the UK is small, with approximately one death for every 8 million pupil visits (Revell 2005). In contrast, road accidents account for approximately 600 child fatalities a year (Gemmell 2004). However, the perception of risk involves far more than a straightforward appraisal of statistical evidence. It has been argued that risk perception is intimately tied to intuitive and experiential thinking, guided by emotional and affective processes (Slovic 2000a, xxxi). The concept of risk is inherently subjective; it does not exist out there, independent of our minds and cultures, waiting to be measured (Slovic 2000b, 392). The findings from this research highlight the subjectivity involved in risk perception and the discrepancy between those who seek to classify and manage fieldwork risk and those teachers who undertake fieldwork. Central to the reflexive modernization identified by Beck (1992) is the monitoring of risk (Giddens 1991). Risk assessments are a common way of monitoring risk, and they are now a central part of the fieldwork planning process in UK schools. Current approaches to risk assessment and risk management used in the study area are based on the common view of risk as some objective function of likelihood and undesirable consequences (Slovic 2000b). Interestingly, the teachers did not share the view that risk was synonymous with expected injury or mortality; rather, the teachers viewed risk in terms of their personal risk of litigation. Central to these teachers concerns about the risk of litigation was the issue of student behaviour coupled with the perception of a prevailing compensation culture. The idea of trust (Luhmann 1979) is clearly important here, since social relationships of all types, including risk management, rely heavily on trust (Slovic 2000b, 409). Central to the concept of trust is the idea of responsibility (Barber 1983). The teachers experience of poor behaviour in the classroom has made them reluctant to take some of their students out into the field because they do not trust them to behave. Instead, some of the teachers are increasingly choosing to contain their students within the classroom where they perceive the risk of being held personally responsible should something go wrong to be less. This responsibility towards the self is reflective of what Besk-Gernsheim (2000, 132) termed an individualized society. Such containment is indicative of the need for some of these teachers to re-evaluate the role and value of fieldwork. Only one teacher recognized the potential for fieldwork to appeal to the wide range of different learning styles inherent among geography students (Healey et al. 2005). Risk perception is highly subjective, influenced in part by an individuals judgement of the perceived benefits and their like or dislike of an activity (Alhakami and Slovic 1994). Similarly, these teachers perceptions of the role and value of fieldwork were influencing their perceptions of fieldwork risk.

Conclusions and implications

Through an exploration of teachers perceptions of the role and value of fieldwork in the context of the perceived risks associated with fieldwork and the practicalities influencing fieldwork provision, we are able to gain a deeper understanding of teachers perceptions of fieldwork risk. The amount of red tape involved in the planning process, the cost of fieldwork and the risk of litigation were the main external structural constraints influencing fieldwork provision at Key Stage 3; however, it was the teachers perceptions of the role and value of fieldwork that influenced whether they were deterred by these external structural constraints. Despite the governments commitment to zero tolerance of poor behaviour in schools, no connection has yet been made between the issues of student behaviour and the decline of fieldwork in schools. However, they are clearly interrelated. The extent to which teachers can trust their students to behave is arguably central to an understanding of teachers perceptions of the risk of litigation, since a perception of trust indicates a low level of risk, which then makes the subject more willing to undertake the risk and thus grant trust (Das and Teng 2004, 111). The case study indicates that the issue of poor behaviour was also undermining fieldworks potential role in facilitating social inclusion because two schools were excluding unruly students from fieldwork. Social inclusion was also difficult to achieve because many of these students were from families for whom the cost of fieldwork was prohibitive. These findings are especially concerning given the current drive to promote inclusive fieldwork (Geographical Association 2006) and highlight the need for further research into inclusion in the field. The findings demonstrate that these teachers construct risk in a different way from their Local Education Authority, which defines it in terms of expected injury or mortality. Risk is therefore highly subjective (Slovic 2000b) and teachers perceptions of fieldwork risk are clearly more complex than they may superficially appear to be. However, it would

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

Geography fieldwork in a risk society 419 be wrong to conclude that these teachers perceptions of fieldwork risk are false because, to them, the risks they perceive are very real indeed. Trying to reassure them with statistical evidence will therefore be futile; rather, it is likely that they would need to re-evaluate the role and value of fieldwork before they would be willing to re-enter the field. Academic geographers need to recognize their role in such a re-evaluation, especially if they wish to avoid being faced in the future with students who have had only a limited range of fieldwork experience or whose enthusiasm in the subject (Dalton 2001) has been dampened. Although many geography teachers acknowledged that fieldwork played an integral role within the discipline, the epistemological positioning of fieldwork within secondary school geography has clearly changed. This change is evident from the way in which fieldwork was generally seen as impractical and the way in which fieldwork had declined at four of the six case-study schools. Secondary school geography fieldwork had become increasingly distant for the teachers at these schools, both geographically and temporally; it was increasingly imagined as peripheral to the subject, something that they themselves or other geography teachers undertook in a bygone era. These spatial imaginations encapsulate an implicit relationship of power between geography teachers and their students. Imagining fieldwork as peripheral to the subject, for instance, raises the question of the assumption of students right to undertake geography fieldwork. This is especially evident at Key Stage 3, where the external structure provided by the National Curriculum was circumvented at four of the six schools. This may entail stark implications for citizens of the future, given the already prevalent concern that children could become disconnected from the natural environment, especially those from low-income urban areas (Thomas and Thompson 2004). To redress this balance of power a fieldwork entitlement, such as that currently under consideration by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, would have to stipulate a minimum requirement for fieldwork at Key Stage 3. In turn, fieldwork may become one of geographys most powerful assets that can be championed to secure the subjects future viability within the secondary school curriculum, especially in schools such as Grange and Rushton Schools where geography currently occupies a notably marginal position in the curriculum. If, for the sake of survival in the jungle of curriculum politics, geography may need an essence to defend (Walford 2001, 315), then arguably this essence could be fieldwork.

Acknowledgements
Thank you to the teachers who helped with this research and to the three anonymous referees for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

References
Alhakami A S and Slovic P 1994 A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit Risk Analysis 14 108596 Barber B 1983 The logic and limits of trust Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick NJ Beck U 1992 Risk society: towards a new modernity Ritter M trans Sage, London Besk-Gernsheim E 2000 Health and responsibility: from social change to technological change and vice versa in Adam B, Beck U and Van Loon J eds The risk society and beyond: critical issues for social theory Sage, London 122 35 Bracken L J and Mawdsley E 2004 Muddy glee: rounding out the picture of women and physical geography fieldwork Area 36 2806 Dalton R T 2001 What do they bring with them? The fieldwork experiences of undergraduates on entry into higher education Journal of Geography in Higher Education 25 37993 Das T K and Teng B-S 2004 The risk-based view of trust: a conceptual framework Journal of Business and Psychology 19 85116 Driver F 2001 Geography militant: cultures of exploration in the age of empire Blackwell, Oxford Education and Skills Committee 2005 Education outside the classroom: second report of session 20042005: report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Stationery Office, London Franklin J 1998 Introduction in Franklin J ed The politics of risk society Polity Press, Cambridge 18 Gemmell J 2004 Experience of a lifetime The Times Educational Supplement 5 March Geographical Association 2005 Focus on fieldwork The Geographical Association Magazine 80 13 Geographical Association 2006 The action plan for geography (http://www.geography.org.uk/download/ GA_APGproposals.doc) Accessed 13 May 2006 Giddens A 1991 Modernity and self-identity: self and society in the late modern age Stanford University Press, Stanford CA Giddens A 1994 Risk, trust, reflexivity in Beck U, Giddens A and Lash S eds Reflexive modernization: politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order Polity in association with Blackwell, Cambridge 18497 Hall T, Healey M and Harrison M 2002 Fieldwork and disabled students: discourses of exclusion and inclusion

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006

420 Cook et al.

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers New Series 27 21331 Healey M, Kneale P, Bradbeer J with other members of the INLT Learning Styles and Concepts Group 2005 Learning styles among geography undergraduates: an international comparison Area 37 3042 Job D 1996 Geography and environmental education: an exploration of perspective and strategies in Kent A, Lambert D, Naish M and Slater F eds Geography in education: viewpoints on teaching and learning Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2249 Lambert D and Balderstone D 2000 Learning to teach geography in the secondary school: a companion to school experience Routledge, London Luhmann N 1979 Trust and power: two works by Niklas Luhmann John Wiley, Chichester Luhmann N 1988 Familiarity, confidence, trust: problems and alternatives in Gambetta D ed Trust: making and breaking co-operative relations Blackwell, Oxford 94107 Nairn K 2002 Doing feminist fieldwork about geography fieldwork in Moss P ed Feminist geography in practice: research and methods Blackwell, Oxford 14659 OBrien M, Jones B and Sloan D 2000 Childrens independent spatial mobility in the urban public realm Childhood 7 25777 Revell P 2005 Outdoors is great The Guardian 15 March Ross S 2001 The geography of awe and wonder Teaching Geography 26 868 Sauer C O 1956 The education of a geographer Annals of the Association of American Geographers 46 28799 Sibley D 1995 Families and domestic routines: constructing the boundaries of childhood in Pile S and Thrift N eds Mapping the subject: geographies of cultural transformation Routledge, London 12337 Slovic P 2000a Introduction and overview in Slovic P ed The perception of risk Earthscan, London xxixxxvii Slovic P 2000b Trust, emotion, sex, politics and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield in Slovic P The perception of risk Earthscan, London 390412 Stoddart D 1986 On geography and its history Blackwell, Oxford Thomas G and Thompson G 2004 A childs place: why environment matters to children Green Alliance/DEMOS, London Valentine G 2004 Public space and the culture of childhood Ashgate, Aldershot Walford R 2001 Geographys odyssey: the journey so far Geography 86 30517 Woodcock R G and Bailey M J 1978 Quantitative geography Macdonald and Evans, Plymouth Woolley H 2006 Freedom of the city: contemporary issues and policy influences on children and young peoples use of public open space in England Childrens Geographies 4 4559

ISSN 0004-0894 The Authors. Journal compilation Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2006