GEOGRAPHY IN SECONDARY EDUCATION: AN ANALYSIS
OF THE STRUCTURE OF CURRICULA AND THEIR
EV ALUATION
GEOGRAFIJA V SEKUNDARNEM IZOBRAŽEV ANJU:
ANALIZA STRUKTURE IN VREDNOTENJE UČNEGA
NAČRTA IN KATALOGA ZNANJA
AUTHORS/A VTORICE
dr. Tatjana Resnik Planinc
University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Geography, Aškerčeva cesta 2, SI – 1000 Ljubljana,
Slovenia
tatjana.resnik@ff.uni-lj.si
dr. Eva Konečnik Kotnik
University of Maribor, Faculty of Arts, Department of Geography, Koroška cesta 160, SI – 2000 Maribor,
Slovenia
eva.konecnik@um.si
dr. Karmen Kolnik
University of Maribor, Faculty of Arts, Department of Geography, Koroška cesta 160, SI – 2000 Maribor,
Slovenia
karmen.kolnik@um.si
dr. Mojca Ilc Klun
University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Geography, Aškerčeva cesta 2, SI – 1000 Ljubljana,
Slovenia
mojca.ilcklun@ff.uni-lj.si
DOI: 10.3986/GV92101
UDC/UDK: 91:373.5.016(497.4)
COBISS: 1.01
ABSTRACT
Geography in secondary education: an analysis of the structure of curricula and their evaluation 
The purpose of this paper is to present some of the results of a broader survey of current geography cur-
ricula at primary and secondary levels of education in Slovenia. The primary aim of the study was to find
out what kind of curricula for geography lessons teachers of geography and others interested in geography
would like to see at different levels of education. The study consisted of two parts: in the first part, we took
an analytical view of the primary school curriculum in geography, and in the second part, which is pro-
vided in this paper, we focused on the secondary educational level, looking at both gymnasiums and secondary
vocational and technical education. We present the opinions of the survey respondents on the basic con-
ceptual orientation of the geography curricula in gymnasiums and in secondary vocational and technical
9
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020, 9–35 Papers/Razprave
P APERS/RAZPRAVE
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 9

10
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
schools, their elementary structure and scope, and the respondents’ reflections on the comprehensiveness,
usefulness and suitability of individual curriculum elements for teaching geography.
KEY WORDS
geography, curriculum, geography teachers, gymnasium, secondary vocational and technical education
IZVLEČEK
Geografija v sekundarnem izobraževanju: analiza strukture in vrednotenje učnega načrta in kata-
loga znanja 
Namen prispevka je predstaviti del rezultatov širše raziskave o dosedanjih geografskih učnih načrtih na
primarni in sekundarni ravni izobraževanja v Sloveniji. Temeljni cilj raziskave je bil ugotoviti, kakšne učne
načrte za pouk geografije si želijo učitelji geografije in druga zainteresirana geografska javnost na razli-
čnih vzgojno-izobraževalnih ravneh. Raziskava je bila dvodelna; v prvem delu smo osvetlili analitični pogled
na osnovnošolski učni načrt za geografijo, v drugem delu, ki ga podajamo v tem prispevku, pa smo se osre-
dotočili na srednješolsko vzgojno-izobraževalno raven, in sicer tako na gimnazijsko kot na srednje strokovno
in poklicno-tehniško izobraževanje. Predstavljamo mnenje anketiranih o osnovni konceptualni usmeri-
tvi učnega načrta za geografijo v gimnaziji ter kataloga znanja za geografijo v srednjem strokovnem in
poklicno-tehniškem izobraževanju, o njuni elementarni strukturi in obsegu ter razmišljanja anketiranih
o vključenosti, uporabnosti in ustreznosti posameznih elementov učnega načrta oziroma kataloga zna-
nja za pouk geografije.
KLJUČNE BESEDE
geografija, učni načrti, katalogi znanja, učitelji geografije, gimnazija, srednje strokovno in poklicno-teh-
niško izobraževanje
The article was submitted for publication on March 3, 2020.
Uredništvo je prispevek prejelo 3. marca 2020.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 10

1 Introduction
More than ten years ago, Konečnik Kotnik (2008) highlighted a lack of subject-based education
research that would guide the development of curricula over a longer period of time, and suggested
that more research attention should be paid to this area of geography education in future, since due
to the new curriculum reforms it would be easier to introduce the necessary and desired changes.
Senegačnik (2005) noted that curriculum reform, if carried out in the absence of subject-based research,
could lead to the dominance of »arguments of power« instead of »the power of arguments«. Often,
one of the key problems with the curriculum revisions so far has been the lack of time for careful reflec-
tion, which has led to curricula that some teachers have not been completely happy with (Konečnik
Kotnik et al. 2018). With our study of geography curricula, we hoped to help fill that gap and find out
what kind of curricula for geography lessons teachers of geography at different educational levels would
like to use.
This study of geography curricula in Slovenia began as an online chat in the framework of the
Conference of Slovenian Geographers in Maribor in September 2017. It later grew beyond the initial
framework and continued as survey research until April 2018 through the »Geolista« online group. Thus
in 2018, the first part of the survey »What kind of curriculum do primary school geography teachers
want?« (Konečnik Kotnik et al. 2018) was published; in this article we now turn to the second part of
the study, which looks at the secondary education level.
As our starting point in this research, we took Strmčnik’s definition of the curriculum as a profes-
sional document that combines and adapts the learning content and its purpose to students’
receptiveness and educational needs, with the task of adapting learning objectives and content direct-
ly to teaching use (Strmčnik 2001). In highlighting the basic research question of how the guidelines,
principles and goals of updating geography curricula to date have linked the findings of research on
geography teaching and learning, we sought to obtain a useful framework for analysing geography cur-
ricula through a survey of the views of geography teachers. We believe that this is not only for the benefit
of future curriculum designers, but also for the (self) evaluation of the teachers. We all have to under-
stand that »bridging the gap between theory and research on learning and educational practice is a huge
challenge for researchers and professionals alike, and also for all those who design educational policy and
can help reduce the »great dividing line« between them« (O naravi … 2013, 45).
In recent decades, as research on learning has intensified, there has also been an increasing expec-
tation that this will help to improve its planning (e.g. curricula), the teaching materials and practical
work in the classroom (O  naravi … 2013). Among the basic components for achieving quality
progress are: competencies that must be acquired; learning processes needed to acquire compe-
tencies; guidelines and principles to introduce and support learning processes; and evaluation
methods to monitor and improve learning processes (De Corte, Verschaffel and Masui 2004). In addi-
tion to content for use in geography teaching, a basis for designing the research instrumentation used
was outlined.
Even good pedagogical documentation cannot produce concrete instructions that could be direct-
ly applied in practice, but it can be a good basis for teachers to flexibly and creatively use teaching
guidelines for pursuing students’ geography competency taught at secondary level and for planning,
implementation and assessment of the learning outcomes of their educational practice. A prereq-
uisite for the successful implementation of curricula in educational practice is first and foremost
qualified and motivated teachers, who are not just consumers or transmitters of expertise pro-
duced by others but also co-designers and especially co-authors of the evaluation of teaching and
learning results. Their task is not merely to respond to changes (legislation, social realities, new aca-
demic knowledge, etc.); they must also develop the ability to anticipate students’ needs by being
proactive, which is based on the educational foundations for the co-responsible behaviour of every
educator.
11
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 11

2 Methodological approaches
The purpose of this study was to obtain the views of geography teachers on curricula for secondary
education, i.e. on the gymnasium curriculum (adopted at the 110th session of the Expert Council of
the Republic of Slovenia on 14 February 2008; editorial review carried out at the 155th session of the
Expert Council of the Republic of Slovenia for General Education on 28 February 2013) (Polšak et al.
2008) and the curricular document for secondary vocational and technical education (determined by
the Expert Council of the Republic of Slovenia for General Education at its 99th session on 15 February
2007) (Srednje strokovno … 2007).
We initially used the descriptive method in our research work. In the applied part, we conducted
a quantitative empirical non-experimental study (Sagadin 1993) in which we collected data using a sur-
vey. The data obtained in this way were statistically processed. The data collection instrument was an
online survey produced using the online tool 1ka.si. The survey began with general questions (e.g. basic
conceptual orientation, structure and scope of the curriculum), then moved on to more specific ques-
tions (e.g. the usefulness and need for inclusion of individual elements of the curriculum and
suggestions by the respondents for substantive changes to the curriculum). The survey also included
demographic questions about the respondent. It consisted of seventeen closed and semi-open ques-
tions (short answer).
As explained earlier, the study first took shape in a chat room in the framework of the Conference
of Slovenian Geographers in Maribor in 2017, and then continued due to the desire to include a wider
circle of geography teachers in the survey through the online group »Geolista«. We provided a link to
the online survey to all involved through this group. Only those surveys that were fully completed were
considered in the presentation of the results.
3 Results
In total, 47 respondents completed the online survey: 27 for gymnasium and 20 for secondary voca-
tional and technical education (hereinafter referred to as SVTE). Of the respondents who evaluated
the gymnasium curriculum in the survey, 70% were women and 30% were men, while of those who
responded to questions on the SVTE curriculum, 85% were women and 15% were men. The greatest
percentage (37%) of those surveyed for the gymnasium curriculum were in the 36–45 age group, 22%
were in the 46–55 age group, 19% were in the 56–65 age group, 11% were in the 26–35 age group and
11% were under 25. The majority of SVTE respondents (60%) were in the 36–45 age group, 15% were
in the 26–35 age group, 15% in the 46–55 age group, and 10% were in the 56–65 age group.
The highest proportion of participants in the gymnasium survey (44%) have been teaching for 16
to 25 years, 11% of participants for less than 5 years, 11% have 6 to 15 years of work experience, and
18% have been teaching for 26 to 45 years. The remaining respondents (16%) who answered questions
relating to the gymnasium curriculum do not teach. We assume that they are geographers whose work
is indirectly related to geography education: higher education geography teachers and geography con-
sultants. All SVTE respondents have less than 25 years of service, and 10% of them less than five years.
In the first part, we asked the respondents about the desired structure of the gymnasium or SVTE
geography curriculum (basic conceptual orientation, structure and scope; Figures 1 and 2).
The respondents rated particular conceptual orientations with scores ranging from 1 (least desir-
able conceptual orientation) to 5 (most desirable conceptual orientation). The average of the scores shows
that a combination of general and regional geography, but with the predominance of general geogra-
phy, would be most desirable for gymnasium education (3.9). A problem-oriented approach with an
emphasis on examples from the regional geography of Slovenia follows, with an average score of 3.7.
By listing a »problem-oriented curriculum« we took an approach based on teaching methodology rather
12
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 12

13
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
… solely general
geography with examples
from the regional
geography of Slovenia
and the world
... solely regional
geography with
occasional
explanations
of general principles
... a combination
of general and
regional geography
(but with the
predominance of
general geography)
... a combination
of general and
regional geography
(but with the
predominance of
regional geography)
... a problem–oriented
approach with
an emphasis on
examples from the
regional geography
of Slovenia
... very similar or
identical to the
current one
Other
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Score
Figure 1: Desired conceptual orientation for the gymnasium geography curriculum.
… solely general
geography with examples
from the regional
geography of Slovenia
and the world
... a combination
of general and
regional geography
(but with the
predominance of
general geography)
... a combination
of general and
regional geography
(but with the
predominance of
regional geography)
... a problem–oriented
approach with
an emphasis on
examples from the
regional geography
of Slovenia
... very similar or
identical to the
current one
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
... solely regional
geography with
explanations of
general principles
simultaneous
Other
Figure 2: Desired conceptual orientation for the geography curriculum in SVTE.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 13

than starting from a content-based conception of geography. The question therefore remains as to what
the respondents’ subjective conceptions are about what a problem-oriented approach means: whether
they have in mind the treatment of particular problems or the problematisation of existing content or
something else. A combination of general and regional geography, but with the predominance of region-
al geography, received an average score of 3.1. This approach is also a characteristic of the current
curriculum, which received an average score of 2.9 as a separate descriptor. From both results, we can
conclude that the current concept of the curriculum is rated on average with a score of 3. A curriculum
that would consist solely of general geography with examples taken from the regional geography of
Slovenia and the world received an average score of 2.8, while the lowest average score (2) was given
to a curriculum that would consist solely of regional geography with simultaneous explanations of gen-
eral principles. A tally of the highest scores 4 and 5 indicates that the most highly valued is a combination
of general and regional geography but with a predominance of general geography, followed by a prob-
lem-oriented approach with an emphasis on examples from the regional geography of Slovenia. The
conceptual orientation of the current curriculum was thus evaluated as less desirable but still good. Although
the choice of »other« was frequently selected, the respondents unfortunately did not elaborate.
SVTE respondents gave the highest score (3.8) to a general geography orientation with examples
from the regional geography of Slovenia and the world. This was followed by a problem-oriented approach
with examples from the regional geography of Slovenia (an average score of 3.5), an approach that com-
bined general and regional geography but with the predominance of general geography (3.2), and the
current concept of the curriculum also received a score higher than 3. Here as well the lowest evalu-
ated conceptual orientation was the one in which regional geography predominates.
The sums of the highest scores 4 and 5 give priority to the problem-oriented approach, followed
by a curriculum based on a general geography approach with examples from Slovenia and the world.
Combining the results for both types of secondary education, we can conclude that teachers tend
to favour conceptual orientations that give priority to general geography. According to the results of
the survey, the gymnasium geography curriculum should be based more on general geography than
regional, and the SVTE group showed a similar tendency in their opinion, since in their view the cur-
riculum should be based predominantly on general geography, with highlighted examples from
Slovenia. In both cases, a desire for a problem-oriented approach is evident.
When asked what elements the curriculum for geography education in gymnasiums should
include, 79% of those surveyed ranked most highly (scores of 5 and 4) a geography curriculum that
would include only general learning objectives and competencies and basic standards of knowledge,
but not the other currently existing elements such as definition of the subject, detailed objectives and
content, expected results, interdisciplinary connections, teaching recommendations, and evaluation of
achievements. 35% of the respondents assigned the highest score to a curriculum that would include
only general objectives and competencies, while an equal share of the respondents (35%) assigned the
highest score to a curriculum that would include just a definition of the subject and basic standards of
knowledge. The average score indicates that, in the case of gymnasium (Figure 3), the highest score
(3.9) was given to a curriculum that would include general objectives, competencies and basic stan-
dards of knowledge, but not also, for example, operational objectives. However, it should be noted at
this point that the current curriculum structure, which includes very detailed operational learning objec-
tives, received a relatively high score of 3.2.
A similar situation with respect to the highest scores can be observed for SVTE respondents (Figure 4).
The highest average score (3.7) was given to a more general curriculum (general objectives, compe-
tencies, basic standards), but they are also satisfied with the current one (score of 3.1). The same score
was given to a curriculum structure in which only the general objectives are listed.
The desire for a more skeletal structure is also reflected in the respondents’ desire to reduce the
volume of the curriculum in terms of the number of the pages: the respondents would like something
shorter than the current ones for both gymnasium and SVTE (currently 60 pages for the gymnasium
14
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 14

15
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
Other ... general objectives
only (with reference
to knowledge,
skills, abilities)
... general
objectives and
competencies
only
... general objectives
and competencies
and basic standards
of knowledge
... general definition
of the subject
and basic standards
of knowledge
... all or most of
the sections that
it currently contains
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Score
Figure 3: Average scores for the structure of the gymnasium curriculum.
Other ... general objectives
only (with reference
to knowledge,
skills, abilities)
... general
objectives and
competencies
only
... general objectives
and competencies
and basic standards
of knowledge
... general definition
of the subject
and basic standards
of knowledge
... all or most of
the sections that
it currently contains
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Figure 4: Average scores for the structure of the curriculum in SVTE.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 15

curriculum and 17 pages for the SVTE curriculum). Thus each should be no longer than 5–10 pages.
This choice was given the highest scores (4 and 5) by 69% of the gymnasium respondents and 79% of
the SVTE respondents. The vast majority of the respondents (more than 80% for both secondary edu-
cation courses of study) would like to have a teacher’s manual as a supplement to this kind of curriculum,
containing, for example, planning, assessment based on different levels of learning complexity, sug-
gestions for a selection of learning content, teaching methods, forms of teaching and teaching materials.
In this way the teacher’s manual would also contain elements that would be excluded from the current
structure of both curricular documents. This would provide greater autonomy for teachers and the pos-
sibility of more frequent updating of objectives and content, as the latter would not be tied to periods
of official curricular changes.
In the second part of the survey we asked the respondents about the usefulness (to what extent a par-
ticular element of the curriculum is useful in their work and to what extent it is prepared in a way that
the respondents can use it effectively) and about the degree of necessity for particular elements of the
curriculum (how much the respondents actually need a particular item).
For gymnasium education (Figure 5), the respondents gave the highest scores on usefulness to the
section General objectives and competencies and the section Objectives and content for general geogra-
phy, with the latter also receiving the most high scores of 4 and 5. High scores for usefulness (3.7) were
also given to the sections Objectives and content for the geography of Slovenia and Objectives and con-
tent for regional geography of the world. The section Additional objectives and content for programmes
offering the baccalaureate exam in geography received an average score of 3.4 for usefulness in teach-
ing. Objectives and content for the geography of Europe and Expected achievements/results were given
a score of 3.5, while all other sections of the gymnasium curriculum, with the exception of Definition
of the subject, were scored below a 3 and thus considered less useful by the respondents.
Respondents evaluating the usefulness of the SVTE curriculum (Figure 6) gave the highest scores
to Learning objectives and recommended activities (average score of 3.7) and Minimum standards of knowl-
edge (average score of 3.6). These were followed by the sections Implementing competencies in the subject,
Attitude goals relating to particular learning/thematic units, Guiding general objectives, Optional part:
choice of elective topics offered for an additional 68 hours and finally Introduction, Teaching recommen-
dations, and Assessment.
SVTE respondents gave the highest proportion of scores 5 and 4 to Learning objectives and recom-
mended activities, which is not surprising since this part of the curriculum relates directly to the delivery
of lessons. Since the design of the SVTE curriculum is different from that of the gymnasium curricu-
lum, it is not possible to determine from the basic curriculum structure (the table of contents) which
geography elements would be more useful to the respondents.
We also asked the respondents to what extent the elements of the current gymnasium curriculum
and SVTE curriculum are actually needed. The average scores for the SVTE curriculum indicate (Figure 7)
that the respondents most need the sections Attitude goals relating to particular learning/thematic units
(4.2), Minimum standards (3.8), Learning objectives and recommended activities (3.8), and Guiding gen-
eral objectives (3.8). It is interesting how the need for attitude goals stands out, which may be related
to the specifics of professional orientations, in which greater motivation and a more positive attitude
towards specialised subjects is to be expected compared to general ones such as geography.
In the gymnasium curriculum (Figure 8), according to the respondents, most needed are the sec-
tions on content and operational objectives, in which the highest rated is the need for objectives and
content of general geography and regional geography of the world (3.6) (which is in keeping with the
respondents’ responses as to what kind of curriculum they would like to have), followed by the need
for objectives and content of the geography of Slovenia and Europe (3.5). Among the elements of the
gymnasium curriculum that are least needed according to the respondents are the objectives and con-
tent for the programmes for the baccalaureate exam in geography (3.1), while only the element definition
of the subject (3.0) was rated lower
16
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 16

17
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
Definition
of the
subject
General
objectives/
competencies
Objectives
and content
for general
geography
Objectives
and content
for regional
geography
of the world
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Europe
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Slovenia
Additional
objectives
and content
for programmes
offering the
baccalaureate
exam in geography
Expected
achievements/
results
Interdisici-
plinary
connections
Teaching
recommen-
dations
Evaluation
of
achievements
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Figure 5: Usefulness of the current gymnasium curriculum.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Introduction Implementing
competencies
in the subject
Guiding
general
objectives
of the
subject
Learning
objectives
and
recommended
activities
Attitude goals
relating to
particular
learning/
thematic
units
Minimum
standards
(knowledge
required for a
passing grade)
Teaching
recomm-
endations
Assessment Optional part:
choice of
elective topics
offered for
an additional
68 hours
Figure 6: Usefulness of the elements of the current SVTE curriculum.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 17

The reasons for such a discrepancy in the evaluation of individual structural elements are likely to
be found, for a large share of the respondents, in a distinct lack of understanding or non-acceptance
of the relationship between the curriculum and the Geography Exam Catalogue. Failure to assume that
the geography curriculum is a basic document for all students during the 210-hour geography programme,
and that the Geography Exam Catalogue is a one-year continuation for a specific group of students in
preparation for the baccalaureate exam in geography, is a major misconception that indicates a lack of
awareness (or acceptance) of the different purposes of the two documents. At the same time, we do
not underestimate the problem present in the opinions of the respondents that »the Geography Exam
Catalogue has ruined the curriculum«, and to which we should also respond appropriately within the
framework of the National Education Institute and the Subject Development Commission for
Geography as well as the Commission for the Baccalaureate Exam in Geography, and of course experts
in the field of geography education.
We were also interested in evaluating the suitability of existing elements of the gymnasium geogra-
phy curriculum (Figure 9) and the SVTE geography curriculum (Figure 10) as well as concrete suggestions
from the respondents for substantive changes in both. The suitability of individual elements of the cur-
riculum or curriculum were rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 1 indicating that many changes
in content would be required for a given element and a score of 5 indicating that the element of the
curriculum was entirely suitable.
In the opinion of the respondents, the sections General objectives and competencies, Objectives and
content of general geography and Objectives and content of regional geography of the world are the most
suitable in the gymnasium curriculum (all receiving a score of 3.4), while the section Objectives and
content of the geography of Slovenia and Objectives and content of the geography of Europe were rated
somewhat less suitable (3.2). This was followed by the section Definition of the subject and Additional
objectives and content for programmes offering the baccalaureate exam in geography (3.0); all the remain-
ing sections were in the opinion of respondents less suitable.
In their comments on suitability, the respondents did not provide specific suggestions for changes
to content. They mentioned the numerical imbalance of the written learning objectives (e.g. between
physical and social geography content) and the taxonomic inconsistency in defining the degree of oper-
ationalisation of the objectives themselves (in some cases operational objectives were defined too vaguely,
in others they are very precisely specified). Considerations of this kind emerged especially regard-
ing the teaching content of the regional geography of North and Latin America and in the case of
Western Europe and in the regions of Slovenia, while they were less common in general geography
(with the exception of types of relief and climate, flora and fauna and partly the economy (agricul-
ture, tourism)).
There were also some occasional reflections that the regional geography of Slovenia should be offered
in the lower grades; that it is necessary to set minimum standards more clearly and to write down the
assessment methods that teachers should prioritise when evaluating knowledge; and that the curricu-
lum needs to specify that excursions are compulsory each year (which would make it easier for teachers
justify organizing them). Although these are individual comments from the respondents, they give us
pause to think that the chapter on Teaching recommendations has a much more important function than
the respondents attributed to it in assessing the suitability of the elements of the current gymnasium
curriculum (Figure 9), or the teachers do not take it sufficiently into account.
In the SVTE curriculum (Figure 10), all elements were given a score of 3 or higher (up to 3.6) for
usefulness. Most suitable were guiding general objectives (3.6), followed closely by attitude goals, and
learning objectives with recommended activities. Least suitable was the section Optional part: choice
of elective topics offered for an additional 68 hours (3.0). Descriptive comments with suggestions for
improvements were considerably less frequent compared to the results for gymnasium. Individual desires
were reflected in the area of a more concretised record of individual objectives. In comments, the cur-
riculum was praised as good.
18
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 18

19
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
Introduction Implementing
competencies
in the
subject
Guiding
general
objectives
of the
subject
Learning
objectives
and recomm-
ended
activities
Attitude goals
relating to
particular
learning/
thematic
units
Minimum
standards
(knowledge
required
for a passing
grade)
Teaching
recommen-
dations
Assessment Optional part:
choice of
elective topics
offered for an
additional
68 hours
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4.5
4
Score
Figure 7: The need for the elements of the current SVTE curriculum.
Definition
of the
subject
General
objectives/
competencies
Objectives
and content
for general
geography
Objectives
and content
for regional
geography
of the world
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Europe
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Slovenia
Additional
objectives
and content
for programmes
offering the
baccalaureate
exam in geography
Expected
achievements/
results
Interdisici-
plinary
connections
Teaching
recommen-
dations
Evaluation
of
achievements
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Figure 8: The need for current gymnasium curriculum elements.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 19

20
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
Definition
of the
subject
General
objectives/
competencies
Objectives
and content
for general
geography
Objectives
and content
for regional
geography
of the world
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Europe
Objectives
and content
for the
geography
of Slovenia
Additional
objectives
and content
for programmes
offering the
baccalaureate
exam in geography
Expected
achievements/
results
Interdisici-
plinary
connections
Teaching
recommen-
dations
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Evaluation
of
achievements
Figure 9: Suitability of the elements in the current gymnasium curriculum.
Introduction Implementing
competencies
in the
subject
Guiding
general
objectives
of the
subject
Learning
objectives
and recomm-
ended
activities
Attitude goals
relating to
particular
learning/
thematic
units
Minimum
standards
(knowledge
required
for a passing
grade)
Teaching
recommen-
dations
Assessment
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Score
Optional part:
choice of
elective topics
offered for an
additional
68 hours
Figure 10: Suitability of the elements in the current SVTE curriculum.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 20

4 Discussion
This paper has presented the opinions of 47 participating respondents who completely filled in a sur-
vey on the basic conceptual orientation of the geography curriculum for gymnasium (adopted at the
110th session of the Expert Council of the Republic of Slovenia on 14 February 2008; editorial review
carried out at the 155th session of the Expert Council of the RS for General Education on 28 February
2013) (Polšak et al. 2008) and the curricular document for secondary vocational and technical edu-
cation (determined by the Expert Council of the Republic of Slovenia for General Education at its 99th
session on 15 February 2007) (Srednje strokovno … 2007), their structure and scope, and an evaluation
of the representation and suitability of their individual elements for secondary geography education. We
are aware that the number of secondary school teachers participating in the survey is low. Despite our
desire and attempts to achieve a greater response among teachers, since there are more than 200 sec-
ondary schools in Slovenia (and although not all have geography teachers, some have more than one),
only a small proportion of teachers responded.
Generalisation of the answers shows that the respondents evaluated the existing conceptual ori-
entation of both the gymnasium and SVTE geography curriculum as good. In the continuation of the
survey, among the offered combinations of conceptual orientation in the gymnasium curriculum, they
rated most highly a combination of general and regional geography in which general geography pre-
dominates. This was followed by a problem-oriented approach with an emphasis on examples from
the regional geography of Slovenia. Respondents evaluating the SVTE curriculum gave the highest rat-
ing to a general geography orientation with examples from the regional geography of Slovenia and the
world, followed by a problem-oriented approach with examples from the regional geography of Slovenia.
A comparison of the results of both types of secondary education shows that teachers tend to favour
conceptual orientations that emphasize general geography. In the case of gymnasium education, there
should be more of this type than regional; in SVTE there should be just general geography. In both cases,
a preference for the problem-oriented approach can be observed. Here the survey did not identify the
subjective perceptions of the respondents regarding the significance for teaching and particular fea-
tures of a problem-oriented curriculum, nor the degree of differences among the respondents in the
understanding and interpretation of the curriculum or in their understanding of the autonomy (and
responsibility) to create yearly preparations and thematic units, and select learning objectives from the
curriculum in order to adapt to the needs of learners and learning conditions, etc. (Konečnik Kotnik
et al. 2018).
Generally speaking, the respondents were satisfied with the current structure of the curriculum,
but they would like to have a gymnasium curriculum that would include general objectives, compe-
tencies and basic standards of knowledge, and not, for example, operational objectives, and a SVTE
curriculum that would be more general (general objectives, competencies, core standards) or a cur-
riculum listing only general objectives. Preferences for a reduced structure in terms of elements were
also reflected in the desire to reduce the volume of the curriculum in terms of the number of pages,
for both gymnasium and SVTE schools – both groups of respondents propose a volume of 5–10 pages.
The vast majority of those surveyed (over 80% for both groups) would also like to see a teachers’ man-
ual to accompany the curriculum, in which examples of lesson plans, assessments based on different
levels of difficulty, suggestions for selecting content, and teaching methods, modes and materials would
be provided. The possibility of combining a more general and especially less extensive curriculum with
an accompanying manual for its implementation could facilitate greater teacher autonomy and possi-
bly also more efficient implementation or realisation of the programme (curriculum). It could also enable
more regular updating of teaching objectives, content and approaches by means of an (online) manual
(Konečnik Kotnik et al. 2018).
In the gymnasium curriculum, the most useful were the sections General objectives and competen-
cies and Objectives and content of general geography, while in the SVTE curriculum the highest rated sections
21
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 21

were Learning objectives and recommended activities and Minimum standards of knowledge. With respect
to the suitability of the sections, for the gymnasium curriculum respondents considered the chapters
General objectives and competencies, Objectives and content of general geography, and Objectives and con-
tent of regional geography of the world to be most suitable, but did not advance any specific proposals
for substantive changes. In the SVTE curriculum, the respondents evaluated guiding general objectives
as most suitable, followed immediately by attitude goals and learning objectives with recommended
activities.
5 Conclusion
In his chapter on effective approaches to curriculum development in geography, Lambert (2003)
discusses the question of whether education is primarily intended to meet the needs of society and the
economy, or whether it should provide individuals with extensive experience and knowledge, thereby
equipping them with life skills. The geography curriculum is intended to be in line with educational
guidelines, social needs and geographical science, but it is a fact that the structure itself, and of course
along with this the goal orientation of the curriculum as the main document for geography education,
is influenced by different interest groups (educational policy, pedagogical and geographical institutions,
geography teachers, the general public, etc.) (Konečnik Kotnik et al. 2018). Therefore, as noted by Kolnik
and Konečnik Kotnik (2010), the final structure of the curriculum is always a compromise solution.
However, in this respect it should be stressed that the curriculum, as the basic document for geog-
raphy education at the secondary level, defines its mission more broadly than the Geography Exam
Catalogue, namely by »empowering the learner for life«, according to Lambert (2003). In contrast, the
purpose of the Geography Exam Catalogue has a much narrower scope, related to measurement (and
hence differentiation of students in further education) and even then just a portion of knowledge and
skills achieved by only a portion (again) of secondary students. And it is this obvious ambiguity (or
perhaps it is deliberately ignored) in the purpose of both documents that is well reflected in the opin-
ions of the surveyed teachers of the »great usefulness« of those elements of the curricula that are
operational (what and how much of something) and the »low usefulness« of those structural elements
that give meaning to the educational mission of school geography (teaching recommendations and def-
inition of the subject). It would also be worth considering the opinions of some of the surveyed geography
teachers and their professional empowerment, for whom a potentially narrower curriculum (»fewer
pages«) and a teaching manual would be welcome because it would potentially bring »essential things«
and models (prepared lesson plans) for teaching, which was also possible to read or deduce from some
reflections. Do we really want this kind of uniformity and simplification, which ignores the diversity
of learners in their abilities and interests, learning environments, and working conditions?
In 2008, the most recent updating of geography curricula in Slovenia took place, from top to bot-
tom, from primary school through secondary education. The update was based on uniform national
starting points in order to allow continuity from one educational programme to another (Ivanuš Grmek
et al. 2009). Kolnik and Konečnik Kotnik (2009) note that the biggest and constantly present changes
in geography curricula at primary and secondary levels of education are primarily changes in geographical
teaching content as a result of major socio-political changes that geography has responded to as an aca-
demic discipline. National educational guidelines have prevailed in the field of curriculum structure
and in accompanying educational philosophies, while the impact of the geographical sciences has been
most pronounced so far in content relating to the definition of defining spatial and regional units and
the study of regions (Kolnik and Konečnik Kotnik 2009).
Given the average 10-year intervals between one curriculum renewal and the next in Slovenia, we
hope that the next renewal can be expected soon. An evaluation of existing documents as the first step
in the process already began in December 2019 under the auspices of the National Education Institute
22
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geography in secondary education …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 22

Slovenia. In the process of renewal, the geography profession should understand the geography cur-
riculum, i.e. »the whole rational basis of an institution’s or individual teacher’s educational programme«,
which also includes subtle aspects of curricular change and development, and the presumed princi-
ples by which learning takes place (Kelly 1989, 9–11 ), as a process and development, and consequently
improve it in an appropriate way and bring it closer to the real needs of those involved in (geography)
education and a dynamic social situation (Konečnik Kotnik et al. 2018).
6 References
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., Masui, C. 2004: The CLIA–model: A framework for designing powerful
learning environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal for Psychology of
Education 19-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173216
Ivanuš Grmek, M., Bakračevič Vukman, K., Cencič, M., Čagran, B., Javornik Krečič, M., Schmidt,
M., Žakelj, A. 2009: Načrtovanje vzgojno-izobraževalnega procesa – koncepti načrtovanja kurikula.
Zaključno poročilo, ciljno raziskovalnega projekta. Pedagoška fakulteta Univerze v Mariboru, Maribor.
Medmrežje: https://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-GURJWWRD/84015566-0452-4d07-
b64a-24f325258fd0/PDF (20. 1. 2020).
Kelly, A. V . 1989: The Curriculum – Theory and Practice. London.
Kolnik, K., Konečnik Kotnik, E. 2009: Razvoj strukture geografskih učnih načrtov v slovenskih gim-
nazijah. Pedagoška obzorja 24-2.
Kolnik, K., Konečnik Kotnik, E. 2010: Geografski kurikul kot proces. Geografija, Posodobitve pouka
v gimnazijski praksi. Ljubljana.
Konečnik Kotnik, E. 2008: Vrednotenje učnega načrta za pouk geografije v splošni gimnaziji v Sloveniji
z vidikov družbenih potreb, izobraževalnih smernic in geografske znanosti. Doktorska disertaci-
ja, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Mariboru. Maribor.
Konečnik Kotnik, E., Ilc Klun, M., Resnik Planinc, T., Kolnik, K. 2018: What kind of curriculum do
Slovenian geography teachers in primary school want? Dela 50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4312/
dela.50.45-80
Lambert, D. 2003: Effective approaches to curriculum development in geography. International Handbook
on Geographical Education. Dordrecht. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1942-1_11
O naravi učenja: uporaba raziskav za navdih prakse. Ljubljana, 2013.
Polšak, A., Dragoš, A., Resnik Planinc, T., Škof, U. 2008: Učni načrt. Geografija: gimnazija − splošna,
klasična, ekonomska gimnazija. Ljubljana.
Sagadin, J. 1993: Poglavja iz metodologije pedagoškega raziskovanja. Ljubljana.
Senegačnik, J. 2005: Geografija Evrope v šolskih učbenikih evropskih držav. Doktorska disertacija,
Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani. Ljubljana.
Srednje strokovno izobraževanje (SSI), poklicno-tehniško izobraževanje (PTI)  – Katalog znanja
Geografija. Strokovni svet Republike Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje. Ljubljana, 2007.
Strmčnik, F. 2001: Didaktika: Osrednje teoretične teme. Ljubljana.
23
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Papers/Razprave
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 23

GEOGRAFIJA V SEKUNDARNEM IZOBRAŽEV ANJU:
ANALIZA STRUKTURE IN VREDNOTENJE UČNEGA
NAČRTA IN KATALOGA ZNANJA
1 Uvod
Že pred več kot desetimi leti je Konečnik Kotnikova (2008) ugotavljala, da manjka predmetno didak-
tičnih raziskovalnih podlag, ki bi usmerjale razvoj učnega načrta skozi daljše časovno obdobje, in da
je treba v prihodnje temu področju didaktike geografije posvetiti več raziskovalne pozornosti, saj bo
tako v času nove kurikularne prenove lažje uvesti potrebne in želene spremembe, Senegačnik (2005)
pa je zapisal, da pri reformi učnega načrta, izvedeni brez predmetno didaktičnih raziskovalnih pod-
lag, lahko pride do prevlade »argumentov moči« namesto »moči argumentov«. Pogosto je bila ena ključnih
težav pri dosedanjih prenovah učnih načrtov pomanjkanje časa za tehten razmislek kar je vodilo v učne
načrte, s katerimi del učiteljev ni bil povsem zadovoljen (Konečnik Kotnik s sodelavci 2018). Z razi-
skavo o geografskih učnih načrtih smo želeli prispevati k zapolnitvi te vrzeli in ugotoviti, kakšne učne
načrte za pouk geografije si želijo učitelji geografije na različnih vzgojno-izobraževalnih ravneh.
Raziskava o geografskih učnih načrtih v Sloveniji se je začela kot spletna klepetalnica v okviru
Zborovanja slovenskih geografov v Mariboru septembra 2017, nato pa je prerasla zastavljene okvire in
se nadaljevala kot anketna raziskava do aprila 2018 preko spletne skupine »Geolista«. Leta 2018 je bil
tako objavljen prvi del raziskave »Kakšen učni načrt si želijo osnovnošolski učitelji geografije«
(Konečnik Kotnik s sodelavci 2018), v tem prispevku pa se osredotočamo na drugi del raziskave, ki se
nanaša na srednješolsko vzgojno-izobraževalno raven.
Pri raziskovalnem delu smo izhajali iz Strmčnikove opredelitve učnega načrta kot strokovnega doku-
menta, ki združuje in prilagaja učno vsebino in njeno namembnost dojemljivosti učencev in
vzgojno-izobraževalnim potrebam, pri čemer je njegova naloga didaktična prilagoditev učnih ciljev in
učnih vsebin neposredni učni uporabi (Strmčnik 2001). Pri osvetljevanju temeljnega raziskovalnega
vprašanja o tem, kako so dosedanje smernice, načela in cilji posodabljanja učnih načrtov za geografi-
jo povezali izsledke raziskovanja učenja in učno prakso pouka geografije, smo z  zbranimi mnenji
anketiranih učiteljev geografije želeli pridobiti uporabno ogrodje za analizo geografskih učnih načr-
tov, ne samo za njihove prihodnje snovalce, temveč tudi za (samo)vrednotenje učiteljev, zavedajoč se,
da predstavlja »… premoščanje razkoraka med teorijo in raziskovanjem učenja ter edukacijsko prakso
ogromen izziv tako raziskovalcem kot profesionalcem, obenem pa vsem tistim, ki načrtujejo izobraževalno
politiko in lahko pomagajo zmanjševati »veliko ločnico« med njimi« (O naravi … 2013, 45).
V zadnjih desetletjih z intenzifikacijo znanstvenega preučevanja učenja narašča tudi pričakovanje,
da bo to pripomoglo tako k izboljšanju njegovega načrtovanja (na primer učnih načrtov), kot izbolj-
šanju učil in praktičnega dela v učilnicah (O naravi … 2013). Med osnovne komponente za doseganje
kakovostnega napredka se tako uvrščajo: kompetence, ki morajo biti usvojene; učni procesi, ki so potreb-
ni za usvojitev kompetenc; smernice in principi, s katerimi vpeljemo in podpiramo učne procese ter
metode za vrednotenje, s katerimi nadzorujemo in izboljšujemo učne procese (De Corte, Verschaffel
in Masui 2004). Našteto je bilo (ob geografskih učnih vsebinah) podlaga tudi za oblikovanje upora-
bljenega raziskovalnega instrumentarija.
Še tako dobra pedagoška dokumentacija ne more proizvesti konkretnih navodil, ki bi jih lahko nepo-
sredno uporabili v praksi, lahko pa je dobra podlaga učiteljem za fleksibilno in ustvarjalno uporabo
didaktičnih smernic za uresničevanje geografske kompetentnosti učečih se na srednješolski ravni ter
za načrtovanje, izvajanje in presojo učnih izidov njihove izobraževalne prakse. Pogoj za uspešno izpe-
ljavo učnih načrtov v izobraževalni praksi so v prvi vrsti usposobljeni in motivirani učitelji, ki niso le
uporabniki oziroma prenašalci strokovnega znanja, ki ga proizvajajo drugi, temveč tudi sooblikoval-
24
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 24

ci, predvsem pa soavtorji presoje učinkov poučevanja in učenja. Njihova naloga ni samo reagirati na
spremembe (na primer zakonodaje, družbene realnosti, novih znanstvenih spoznanj), temveč mora-
jo razvijati sposobnost predvidevanja potreb učečih se skozi proaktivnost, ki je zasnovana tako na
izobraževalnih kot vzgojnih temeljih soodgovornega ravnanja slehernega pedagoga.
2 Metodološki pristopi
Namen raziskave je bil pridobiti mnenja učiteljev geografije o učnih načrtih za srednješolsko izobra-
ževanje, to je o učnem načrtu za geografijo za gimnazijo (sprejet na 110. seji Strokovnega sveta Republike
Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje 14. 2. 2008; redakcijski pregled opravljen na 155. seji Strokovnega
sveta Republike Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje 28. 2. 2013) (Polšak s sodelavci 2008) ter učnem
načrtu oziroma katalogu znanj (kot je kurikularni dokument v tem primeru poimenovan) za geogra-
fijo za srednje strokovno in poklicno tehniško izobraževanje (določil Strokovni svet Republike
Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje na 99. seji dne 15. 2. 2007) (Srednje strokovno … 2007).
Pri raziskovalnem delu smo uvodoma uporabili deskriptivno metodo. V aplikativnem delu smo izved-
li kvantitativno empirično neeksperimentalno raziskavo (Sagadin 1993), pri kateri smo zbirali podatke
s pomočjo anketnega vprašalnika. Podatke, ki smo jih s to vrsto raziskave dobili, smo statistično obde-
lali. Instrument zbiranja podatkov je bil spletni anketni vprašalnik, izdelan s pomočjo spletnega orodja
1ka.si. V anketni vprašalnik so bila najprej uvrščena splošna vprašanja (na primer osnovna koncep-
tualna usmeritev, struktura in obseg učnega načrta), nato pa smo prešli na bolj specifična vprašanja
(na primer uporabnost in potreba po vključenosti posameznih elementov učnega načrta ter predlogi
anketiranih o vsebinskih spremembah učnega načrta). Anketni vprašalnik je vključeval tudi demografska
vprašanja o anketirancu. Sestavljen je bil iz sedemnajstih vprašanj zaprtega in polodprtega tipa (krat-
ki prosti odgovori).
Kot smo že uvodoma pojasnili, se je raziskava najprej odvijala kot spletna klepetalnica v okviru
Zborovanja slovenskih geografov v Mariboru leta 2017, nato pa se je, zaradi želje po vključitvi širšega
kroga učiteljev geografije v raziskavo, nadaljevala preko spletne skupine »Geolista«. Preko omenjene
spletne skupine smo vsem vključenim posredovali povezavo do spletnega anketnega vprašalnika. V pri-
kazu rezultatov smo upoštevali zgolj tiste anketne vprašalnike, ki so bili v celoti izpolnjeni. 
3 Rezultati
V celoti je spletni anketni vprašalnik izpolnilo 47 anketirancev, od teh 27 za gimnazijo ter 20 za
srednje strokovno in poklicno-tehniško izobraževanje (v nadaljevanju SSI+PTI). Med anketiranci, ki
so v raziskavi evalvirali gimnazijski učni načrt, je bilo 70 % žensk in 30 % moških, med anketiranci, ki
so se v svojih odgovorih osredotočili na evalvacijo kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI, pa 85 % žensk in 15 %
moških. Med anketiranimi za gimnazijo jih je bilo največ (37 %) v starostni kategoriji od 36 do 45 let,
22 % anketiranih v kategoriji od 46 do 55 let, 19 % v starostni kategoriji od 56 do 65 let, 11 % je bilo
starih od 26 do 35 let, 11 % pa mlajših od 25 let. Največ anketirancev (60 %) za SSI+PTI sodi v staro-
stno kategorijo od 36 do 45 let; 15 % jih je v kategoriji od 26 do 35 let kot tudi v kategoriji od 46 do 55
let, 10 % jih sodi v kategorijo od 56 do 65 let.
Največji delež sodelujočih v raziskavi za gimnazijo (44 %) poučuje od 16 do 25 let, manj kot 5 let
poučuje 11 % sodelujočih, prav tako 11 % sodelujočih poučuje 6 do 15 let, 18 % pa jih poučuje med 26
in 45 let; preostali anketiranci (16 %), ki so odgovarjali za gimnazijo, ne poučujejo. Predvidevamo, da
so to geografi, ki so posredno vezani na geografsko izobraževanje: visokošolski učitelji s področja geo-
grafije in svetovalci za geografijo. Vsi anketiranci za SSI+PTI imajo manj kot 25 let delovne dobe, 10 %
manj kot pet let. 
25
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 25

V prvem delu smo anketirance spraševali o želeni strukturi učnega načrta za geografijo v gimna-
ziji ter kataloga znanja v SSI+PTI (osnovna konceptualna usmeritev, struktura in obseg; sliki 1 in 2).
Anketiranci so odgovarjali tako, da so ocenjevali posamezne konceptualne usmeritve z ocenami
od 1 (najmanj želena konceptualna usmeritev) do 5 (najbolj želena konceptualna usmeritev). Povprečje
ocen pokaže, da bi bila na primeru gimnazije najbolj (ocena 3,9) zaželena kombinacija obče in regio-
nalne geografije, a s prevlado obče geografije. Z oceno 3,7 sledi problemski pristop s poudarjenimi primeri
iz regionalne geografije Slovenije. Z navedbo »problemski učni načrt« smo izhajali iz didaktičnega ozi-
roma metodološkega pristopa in ne iz vsebinske zasnove geografije. Odprto vprašanje zato ostaja, kakšne
so subjektivne predstave anketirancev o pomenu problemskega pristopa – ali imajo v mislih obravna-
vo posameznih problemov ali problematizacijo obstoječih vsebin ali pa kaj drugega. Povprečno oceno
3,1 je pridobila kombinacija obče in regionalne geografije, a s prevlado regionalne geografije, kar je sicer
značilno tudi za sedanji učni načrt, ki pa je bil kot ločen deskriptor povprečno ocenjen z 2,9. Iz obeh
rezultatov bi tako lahko sklepali, da je sedanji koncept učnega načrta v povprečju ocenjen z oceno 3.
Oceno 2,8 je pridobil učni načrt, ki bi bil samo občegeografski s primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije
in sveta, najnižjo povprečno oceno (2) pa je pridobil učni načrt, ki bi bil zgolj regionalnogeografski
s sprotnim pojasnjevanjem občih zakonitosti. Seštevki najvišjih ocen 4 in 5 pokažejo najvišje vredno-
tenje kombinacije obče in regionalne geografije z  več obče geografije, čemur sledi tako imenovan
problemski pristop s poudarjenimi primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije. Konceptualna usmeri-
tev sedanjega učnega načrta je torej ovrednotena nižje, a kot dobra. Kljub temu, da je bila izbira možnosti
»drugo« pogosta, je žal anketiranci niso opredelili.
Anketiranci za SSI+PTI najvišje (z oceno 3,8) vrednotijo občegeografsko usmeritev s primeri iz regio-
nalne geografije Slovenije in sveta. Sledi problemski pristop s primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije
(ocena 3,5), z oceno 3,2 so ocenili kombinacijo obče in regionalne geografije s prevlado obče geogra-
fije, više kot s srednjo oceno pa so ovrednotili tudi sedanji koncept kataloga znanja. Tudi v tem primeru
so najnižje ovrednotene usmeritve, kjer bi prevladovala regionalna geografija.
Seštevki najvišjih ocen 4 in 5 dajejo prednost problemski usmeritvi, ki ji sledi občegeografski kata-
log znanja s primeri iz Slovenije in sveta.
S soočenjem rezultatov obeh vrst srednješolskega izobraževanja lahko ugotovimo, da se učitelji pre-
težno nagibajo h konceptualnim usmeritvam, ki dajejo prednost obči geografiji. V gimnazijskem učnem
načrtu za geografijo naj bi bilo glede na rezultate raziskave obče geografije več kot regionalne, pod-
obno težnjo pa je v raziskavi izpostavila tudi skupina SSI+PTI, saj naj bi bil po njihovem mnenju katalog
znanja bolj občegeografski, s poudarjenimi primeri iz Slovenije. V obeh primerih je zaznati željo po
problemski usmeritvi.
Na vprašanje, katere elemente (poglavja) bi učni načrt za pouk geografije v gimnaziji moral vklju-
čevati, je 79% anketiranih najvišje (z ocenama 5 in 4) ovrednotilo učni načrt za geografijo, ki bi vključeval
le splošne učne cilje in kompetence ter temeljne standarde znanja, ne pa tudi preostalih sedaj obstoje-
čih elementov, kot so opredelitev predmeta, podrobni cilji in vsebine, pričakovani rezultati, medpredmetne
povezave, didaktična priporočila, vrednotenje dosežkov. Po 35 % anketiranih je najvišji oceni dodeli-
lo učnemu načrtu, ki bi vključeval samo splošne cilje in kompetence ali pa samo opredelitev predmeta
in temeljne standarde znanja. Povprečje ocen pokaže, da se v primeru gimnazije (slika 3) najvišje oce-
njuje (3,9) učni načrt, ki bi vključeval splošne cilje, kompetence in temeljne standarde znanja, ne pa
tudi na primer operativnih ciljev. Ob tem pa je treba poudariti, da je tudi sedanja struktura učnega načr-
ta, ki vključuje zelo podrobno zapisane operativne učne cilje, dobila relativno visoko oceno 3,2.
Podobno stanje pri najvišjih ocenah lahko opazimo pri anketirancih za SSI+PTI (slika 4). V pov-
prečju najvišje (z oceno 3,7) ocenjujejo splošnejši katalog znanja (splošni cilji, kompetence, temeljni
standardi), a so zadovoljni tudi s sedanjim (ocena 3,1). Enako oceno je pridobila tudi struktura kata-
loga znanja, kjer bi bili navedeni le splošni cilji.
Želje po skrčeni elementarni strukturi se odražajo tudi v želji po krčenju količinskega obsega učne-
ga načrta in kataloga znanja v smislu števila strani; tako za gimnazijo kot za SSI+PTI bi želeli anketiranci
26
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 26

27
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
… samo
občegeografski,
s primeri iz regionalne
geografije Slovenije
in sveta
... samo
regionalnogeografski,
s sprotnim
pojasnjevanjem
občih zakonitosti
... kombinacija
obče in regionalne
geografije
(a z več obče
geografije)
... kombinacija obče
in regionalne
geografije
(a z več regionalne
geografije)
... problemski
s poudarjenimi
primeri iz
regionalne geografije
Slovenije
... zelo podoben
ali enak sedanjemu
drugo
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
ocena
Slika 1: Želena konceptualna usmeritev učnega načrta za geografijo v gimnaziji.
… samo
občegeografski,
s primeri iz regionalne
geografije Slovenije
in sveta
... samo
regionalnogeografski,
s sprotnim
pojasnjevanjem
občih zakonitosti
... kombinacija
obče in regionalne
geografije
(a z več
obče geografije)
... kombinacija obče
in regionalne
geografije
(a z več regionalne
geografije)
... problemski
s poudarjenimi
primeri iz
regionalne geografije
Slovenije
... zelo podoben
ali enak sedanjemu
drugo
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
Slika 2: Želena konceptualna usmeritev kataloga znanja za geografijo v SSI+PTI.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 27

manjši obseg kot je sedanji (učni načrt za gimnazijo ima sedaj 60, katalog znanja za SSI+PTI pa 17 stra-
ni). Tako naj bi učni načrt kot katalog znanja obsegala 5–10 strani. V primeru gimnazije je najvišji oceni
(4 in 5) pripisalo tej izbiri 69 % anketirancev, v primeru SSI+PTI pa 79 % anketirancev. Velika večina
anketiranih (v primeru obeh srednješolskih smeri preko 80 %) bi ob takem učnem načrtu oziroma
katalogu znanja želela imeti kot prilogo tudi priročnik za učitelje, v katerem bi bili primeri na primer
načrtovanja, ocenjevanja glede na različne ravni učne zahtevnosti, predlogi izbora učnih vsebin, učnih
metod, učnih oblik ter učil. S tem bi priročnik za učitelje vseboval tudi elemente, ki bi se izločili iz seda-
nje strukture obeh kurikularnih dokumentov. Tako bi bila pridobljena večja avtonomija učiteljev in
možnost pogostejšega sprotnega aktualiziranja ciljev in vsebin, saj slednje ne bi bilo vezano na perio-
de uradnih kurikularnih sprememb.
V drugem delu anketnega vprašalnika smo spraševali anketirance o uporabnosti (koliko je posamezen
element učnega načrta oziroma kataloga znanja uporaben pri delu oziroma v koliki meri je pripravljen
tako, da ga lahko anketirani učinkovito uporabljajo) in o stopnji potrebe po posameznih elementih učne-
ga načrta oziroma kataloga znanja (koliko anketiranci posamezni element dejansko potrebujejo).
Anketiranci za področje gimnazije (slika 5) pripisujejo najvišje ocene uporabnosti poglavjema Splošni
cilji in kompetence ter Cilji in vsebine obče geografije. Pri tem je poglavje Cilji in vsebine obče geografi-
je prejelo največ najvišjih ocen, to je ocen 5 in 4. Visoki oceni uporabnosti (3,7) sta prejeli tudi poglavji
Cilji in vsebine geografije Slovenije ter Cilji in vsebine regionalne geografije sveta, pri čemer po seštevku
najvišjih ocen prednjači poglavje Cilji in vsebine regionalne geografije sveta. Cilji in vsebine dodatno za
programe, ki izvajajo maturo iz geografije, so prejeli z vidika uporabnosti pri delu povprečno oceno 3,4.
Cilji in vsebine geografije Evrope ter Pričakovani dosežki/rezultati so bili ovrednoteni s 3,5, vsa ostala poglav-
ja učnega načrta za gimnazijo pa so po mnenju anketirancev manj uporabna – z izjemo Opredelitve predmeta
so bila ocenjena z oceno nižjo od 3.
Pri ocenjevanju stopnje uporabnosti posameznih elementov kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI se je poka-
zalo, da sta bili najvišje ovrednoteni poglavji Učni cilji in priporočene dejavnosti (povprečna ocena 3,7)
ter Minimalni standardi znanja (povprečna ocena 3,6). Po povprečnih ocenah uporabnosti sledijo poglav-
ja Udejanjanje kompetenc pri predmetu, Odnosni cilji, vezani na posamezne učne/tematske sklope,
Usmerjevalni splošni cilji, Izbirni del: ponudba izbirnih sklopov za dodatnih 68 ur ter nazadnje Uvod,
Didaktična priporočila in Ocenjevanje.
Najvišji delež ocen 5 in 4 glede uporabnosti so anketiranci za SSI+PTI (slika 6) pripisali poglavju
Učni cilji in priporočene dejavnosti, kar ne preseneča, saj se ta del kataloga znanja navezuje neposred-
no na izvajanje pouka. Ker je zasnova kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI drugačna kot zasnova učnega načrta
za gimnazijo, iz elementarne strukture kataloga (kazalo) ni mogoče razbrati, katerim geografskim vse-
binam bi anketiranci pripisali večjo uporabnost.
Anketirance smo spraševali tudi, koliko so dejansko potrebni elementi sedanjega učnega načrta ozi-
roma kataloga znanja. V SSI+PTI (slika 7) povprečne ocene kažejo, da anketiranci najbolj potrebujejo
poglavja Odnosni cilji, vezani na posamezne učne/tematske sklope (4,2), Minimalni standardi (3,8), Učni
cilji in priporočene dejavnosti (3,8) ter Usmerjevalni cilji (3,8). Zanimivo je izstopanje potrebe po odnos-
nih ciljih, kar je morda povezano s specifiko strokovnih usmeritev, pri katerih je pričakovana izrazitejša
motivacija in boljši odnos do strokovnih predmetov in manj do splošnih, kot je geografija.
V gimnazijskem učnem načrtu (slika 8) so po mnenju anketirancev najbolj potrebna poglavja z vse-
binami in operativnimi cilji, pri čemer od teh najvišje ocenjujejo potrebo po ciljih in vsebinah obče
geografije in regionalne geografije sveta (3,6) (kar se sklada z odgovori anketirancev o tem, kakšen učni
načrt oziroma katalog bi si želeli), nato pa po ciljih in vsebinah geografije Slovenije in Evrope (3,5). Med
elementi gimnazijskega učnega načrta, ki jih anketiranci najmanj potrebujejo, so cilji in vsebine za pro-
grame, ki izvajajo maturo iz geografije (3,1), nižje je ocenjen zgolj še element opredelitve predmeta (3,0).
Razlogi za takšno razhajanje v vrednotenju posameznih strukturnih elementov so, predvidevamo,
za velik del anketirancev v  izrazitem nerazumevanju ali pa nesprejemanju razmerja učni načrt in
Predmetni izpitni katalog (PIK). Neizhajanje iz tega, da je učni načrt za geografijo temeljni dokument
28
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 28

29
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
… samo splošne
cilje (nanašajoče
se na znanja, spretnosti,
spos bnosti, vrednote) o
… samo splošne
cilje in
kompetence
… splošne cilje
in kompetence
ter temeljne
standarde znanja
… splošno
opredelitev predmeta
ter temeljne
standarde znanja
… vse ali
večino poglavij,
kot jih vsebuje
sedaj
drugo
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
ocena
Slika 3: Povprečne ocene strukture učnega načrta za gimnazijo.
… samo splošne
cilje (nanašajoče
se na znanja, spretnosti,
spos bnosti, vrednote) o
… samo splošne
cilje in
kompetence
… splošne cilje
in kompetence
ter temeljne
standarde znanja
… splošno
opredelitev predmeta
ter temeljne
standarde znanja
… vse ali
večino poglavij,
kot jih vsebuje
sedaj
drugo
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
Slika 4: Povprečne ocene strukture kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 29

30
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
opredelitev
predmeta
splošni
cilji/
kompetence
cilji
in vsebine
obče
geografije
cilji
in vsebine
regionalne
geografije
sveta
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Evrope
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Slovenije
cilji in vsebine
dodatno za
programe, ki
izvajajo maturo
iz geografije
pričakovani
dosežki/
rezultati
medpred-
metne
povezave
didaktična
priporočila
vrednotenje
dosežkov
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
Slika 5: Uporabnost elementov sedanjega učnega načrta za gimnazijo.
uvod udejanjanje
kompetenc
pri predmetu
usmerjevalni
splošni
cilji
predmeta
učni cilji in
priporočene
dejavnosti
odnosni cilji,
vezani
na posamezne
učne/tematske
sklope
minimalni
standardi
(znanje, potrebno
za zadostno
oceno)
didaktična
priporočila
ocenjevanje izbirni del:
ponudba
izbirnih sklopov
za dodatnih 68 ur
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
Slika 6: Uporabnost elementov sedanjega kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 30

31
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
uvod udejanjanje
kompetenc
pri predmetu
usmerjevalni
splošni
cilji
predmeta
učni cilji in
priporočene
dejavnosti
odnosni cilji,
vezani na
posamezne
učne/tematske
sklope
minimalni
standardi
(znanje, potrebno
za zadostno
oceno)
didaktična
priporočila
ocenjevanje izbirni del:
ponudba
izbirnih sklopov
za dodatnih 68 ur
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4,5
4
ocena
Slika 7: Potreba po elementih sedanjega kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI.
opredelitev
predmeta
splošni
cilji/
kompetence
cilji
in vsebine
obče
geografije
cilji
in vsebine
regionalne
geografije
sveta
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Evrope
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Slovenije
cilji in vsebine
dodatno za
programe, ki
izvajajo maturo
iz geografije
pričakovani
dosežki/
rezultati
medpred-
metne
povezave
didaktična
priporočila
vrednotenje
dosežkov
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
Slika 8: Potreba po elementih sedanjega učnega načrta za gimnazijo.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 31

za vse dijake tekom 210-urnega programa geografije, PIK pa je njegovo enoletno nadaljevanje za točno
določeno skupino dijakov kot priprava na maturo iz geografije, je velika napaka, ki kaže na nepozna-
vanje (ali pa na nesprejemanje?) dveh raznolikih namenov prvega in drugega dokumenta. Pri tem pa
ne podcenjujemo tudi v mnenjih anketiranih prisotnega problema, da je »PIK povozil učni načrt«, na
katerega bi morali tudi ustrezno odreagirati tako v okviru Zavoda Republike Slovenije za šolstvo in
Predmetne razvojne komisije za geografijo kot tudi Predmetne maturitetne komisije za geografijo in
seveda strokovnjakov s področja didaktike geografije.
V raziskavi so nas zanimale tudi ocene ustreznosti obstoječih elementov učnega načrta za geogra-
fijo v gimnaziji (slika 9) ter kataloga znanja za geografijo v SSI+PTI (slika 10) ter konkretni predlogi
anketiranih za vsebinske spremembe obeh. Ustreznost posameznih elementov učnega načrta oziroma
kataloga znanja so anketiranci ocenjevali z ocenami od 1 do 5, pri čemer je ocena 1 pomenila, da bi
bile pri določenem elementu potrebne mnoge vsebinske spremembe, ocena 5 pa, da je element učne-
ga načrta oziroma kataloga znanja povsem ustrezen.
V gimnazijskem učnem načrtu so po mnenju anketirancev v največji meri ustrezna poglavja Splošni
cilji in kompetence, Cilji in vsebine obče geografije ter Cilji in vsebine regionalne geografije sveta (vse 3,4),
medtem ko so nekoliko manj ustrezna poglavja Cilji in vsebine geografije Slovenije in Evrope (3,2). Sledi
poglavje Opredelitev predmeta ter Cilji in vsebine dodatno za programe, ki izvajajo maturo iz geografi-
je (3,0), vsa ostala poglavja pa so po mnenju anketirancev manj ustrezna. V svojih komentarjih ustreznosti
anketiranci niso podali konkretnih predlogov za vsebinske spremembe. Omenjeni sta bili številčna neu-
ravnoteženost zapisanih učnih ciljev (na primer med naravno- in družbenogeografskimi vsebinami)
ter taksonomska nedoslednost pri opredelitvi stopnje operacionalizacije samih ciljev (ponekod presplošno
definirani operativni cilji, drugje le ti zelo natančno konkretizirani). Tovrstni razmisleki so se pojavljali
zlasti pri učnih vsebinah regionalne geografije Severne in Latinske Amerike, na primeru Zahodne Evrope
in pri regijah Slovenije, manj pa pri obči geografiji (z izjemo tipov reliefa in podnebja, rastlinstva in
živalstva ter deloma gospodarstva (kmetijstvo, turizem)).
Zaslediti je tudi (sicer posamična) razmišljanja o tem, da bi morala biti regionalna geografija Slovenije
umeščena v nižje letnike; da bi bilo treba jasneje določiti minimalne standarde in zapisati načine oce-
njevanja, ki naj bi jih učitelji prednostno upoštevali pri vrednotenju znanja; da bi bil v učnem načrtu
potreben zapis o tem, da so ekskurzije obvezne vsako leto (kar bi učiteljem omogočilo lažjo argumentacijo
pri organizaciji le teh). Čeprav so to posamične pripombe anketiranih, pa vendarle dajo misliti, da ima
poglavje o Didaktičnih priporočilih vendarle bistveno pomembnejšo funkcijo, kot so mu jo anketirani
pripisali v oceni ustreznosti elementov sedanjega učnega načrta za gimnazijo (slika 9).
V katalogu znanja za SSI+PTI (slika 10) so bili vsi elementi po uporabnosti ocenjeni z oceno 3 ali
višje (do ocene 3,6). Najbolj ustrezni naj bi bili usmerjevalni cilji (3,6), takoj nato pa odnosni cilji in
učni cilji s priporočenimi dejavnostmi (3,5). Najmanj ustrezno naj bi bilo poglavje Izbirni del: ponud-
ba izbirnih sklopov za dodatnih 68 ur (3,0). Opisni komentarji s predlogi izboljšav so bili bistveno redkejši
v primerjavi z rezultati za gimnazijo. Posamične želje so se kazale na področju bolj konkretiziranega
zapisa posameznih ciljev. Katalog znanja je bil v opisnih komentarjih pohvaljen kot dober.
4 Razprava
V prispevku smo predstavili mnenje 47 anketirancev, ki so v celoti izpolnili anketni vprašalnik, nave-
zujoč se na osnovno konceptualno usmeritev geografskega učnega načrta za gimnazijo (učni načrt sprejet
na 110. seji Strokovnega sveta Republike Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje 14. 2. 2008; redakcijski pre-
gled opravljen na 155. seji Strokovnega sveta Republike Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje 28. 2. 2013
(Polšak s sodelavci 2008) ter kataloga znanja za geografijo za srednje strokovno in poklicno tehniško
izobraževanje (določil Strokovni svet Republike Slovenije za splošno izobraževanje na 99. seji dne 15. 2. 2007)
(Srednje strokovno … 2007), na njuno elementarno strukturo in obseg ter na vrednotenje zastopanosti
32
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 32

33
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
opredelitev
predmeta
splošni
cilji/
kompetence
cilji
in vsebine
obče
geografije
cilji
in vsebine
regionalne
geografije
sveta
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Evrope
cilji
in vsebine
geografije
Slovenije
cilji in vsebine
dodatno za
programe, ki
izvajajo maturo
iz geografije
pričakovani
dosežki/
rezultati
medpred-
metne
povezave
didaktična
priporočila
vrednotenje
dosežkov
Slika 9: Ustreznost elementov sedanjega učnega načrta za gimnazijo.
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
ocena
uvod udejanjanje
kompetenc
pri predmetu
usmerjevalni
splošni
cilji
predmeta
učni cilji in
priporočene
dejavnosti
odnosni cilji,
vezani na
posamezne
učne/tematske
sklope
minimalni
standardi
(znanje, potrebno
za zadostno
oceno)
didaktična
priporočila
ocenjevanje izbirni del:
ponudba
izbirnih sklopov
za dodatnih 68 ur
Slika 10: Ustreznost elementov sedanjega kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI.
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 33

in ustreznosti posameznih elementov učnega načrta oziroma kataloga znanja. Zavedamo se nizkega
števila sodelujočih srednješolskih učiteljev, ki so sodelovali v raziskavi. Kljub naši želji in poskusom,
da bi dosegli odziv večjega števila učiteljev, saj je srednjih šol v Sloveniji več kot 200 (vse nimajo uči-
telja geografije, nekatere jih imajo več), se je tudi tokrat odzval le manjši del učiteljev.
Generalizacija odgovorov pokaže, da so anketirani obstoječo konceptualno usmeritev tako učne-
ga načrta za geografijo v gimnaziji kot kataloga znanja za SSI+PTI ocenili kot dobro, v nadaljevanju
pa nato med ponujenimi kombinacijami konceptualne usmeritve v gimnazijskem učnem načrtu naj-
višje ovrednotili kombinacijo obče in regionalne geografije z več obče geografije, čemur sledi problemski
pristop s poudarjenimi primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije. Anketiranci so v katalogu znanja
(SSI+PTI) najvišje ovrednotili občegeografsko usmeritev s primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije
in sveta, zatem pa problemski pristop s primeri iz regionalne geografije Slovenije. Primerjava rezultatov
obeh vrst srednješolskega izobraževanja kaže, da se učitelji pretežno nagibajo h konceptualnim usme-
ritvam, ki dajejo poudarek obči geografiji. Na primeru gimnazije naj bi bilo le te več kot regionalne,
v SSI+PTI pa naj bi bila zgolj obča geografija. V obeh primerih je zaznati željo po problemskem usmer-
janju. Pri tem v anketi nismo ugotavljali subjektivne predstave anketirancev o didaktičnem pomenu
in posameznih značilnostih problemsko naravnanega učnega načrta oziroma kataloga znanja. Prav tako
nismo ugotavljali stopnje razlikovanj med anketiranimi v razumevanju in interpretaciji učnega načrta
oziroma kataloga znanja ter njihovem razumevanju avtonomnosti (in odgovornosti), da po svoje ustvar-
jajo letne priprave, tematske sklope, izbirajo učne cilje iz učnega načrta/kataloga znanja z namenom
prilagoditve učnim potrebam dijakov ter učnim pogojem in podobno (Konečnik Kotnik s sodelavci 2018).
S sedanjo strukturo učnega načrta in kataloga znanja so anketiranci načeloma zadovoljni, bi pa žele-
li imeti gimnazijski učni načrt, ki bi vključeval splošne cilje, kompetence in temeljne standarde znanja
in ne tudi na primer operativnih ciljev, ter katalog znanja SSI+PTI, ki bi bil splošnejši (splošni cilji, kom-
petence, temeljni standardi) oziroma učni načrt, kjer bi bili navedeni le splošni cilji. Želje po skrčeni
elementarni strukturi se odražajo tudi v želji po krčenju količinskega obsega učnih načrtov v smislu
števila strani, saj bi tako za gimnazijo kot za SSI+PTI želeli manjši obseg, kot je sedanji – obe skupini
anketirancev predlagata obseg 5–10 strani. Velika večina anketiranih (v primeru obeh srednješolskih
smeri preko 80 %) bi ob takem učnem načrtu želela tudi priročnik za učitelje kot prilogo k učnemu načr-
tu, v  katerem bi bili primeri na primer načrtovanja, ocenjevanja glede na različne ravni učne
zahtevnosti, predlogi izbora učnih vsebin, učnih metod, učnih oblik ter učil. Možnost kombinacije bolj
splošnega in predvsem krajšega učnega načrta s spremljajočim priročnikom za njegovo uresničevanje
bi lahko ustvarila možnost večje avtonomije učiteljev, morda tudi manjšo časovno stisko pri izvajanju
oziroma uresničevanju programa (učnega načrta) in omogočila rednejšo aktualizacijo oziroma poso-
dabljanje učnih ciljev, vsebin ali učnih pristopov preko (spletnega) priročnika, saj le ta ne bi bil vezan
na uradne kurikularne oziroma sistemske postopke (Konečnik Kotnik s sodelavci 2018).
V gimnazijskem učnem načrtu so anketiranci kot najbolj uporabni (kar pomeni, v koliki meri je pri-
pravljen tako, da ga lahko anketirani učinkovito uporabljajo) navedli poglavji Splošni cilji in kompetence
ter Cilji in vsebine obče geografije, v katalogu znanj za SSI+PTI pa sta bili najvišje ovrednoteni poglavji
Učni cilji in priporočene dejavnosti ter Minimalni standardi znanja. Glede ustreznosti poglavij so v gim-
nazijskem učnem načrtu anketiranci ocenili, da so v največji meri ustrezna poglavja Splošni cilji in
kompetence, Cilji in vsebine obče geografije ter Cilji in vsebine regionalne geografije sveta, vendar niso poda-
li konkretnih predlogov za vsebinske spremembe. V katalogu znanj za SSI+PTI so bili kot najbolj ustrezni
navedeni usmerjevalni cilji, takoj nato pa odnosni cilji in učni cilji s priporočenimi dejavnostmi.
5 Sklep
Lambert (2003) se je v svojem prispevku o efektivnih pristopih k razvoju geografskega kurikula spra-
ševal, ali je izobraževanje v prvi vrsti namenjeno zadovoljevanju potreb družbe in gospodarstva ali pa
34
T. Resnik Planinc, E. Konečnik Kotnik, K. Kolnik, M. Ilc Klun Geografija v sekundarnem …
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 34

bi moralo posamezniku nuditi bogato izkušnjo in znanje in ga s tem opolnomoči za življenje. Učni načrt
za pouk geografije naj bi sledil izobraževalnim smernicam, družbenim potrebam in geografski zna-
nosti, pri čemer je dejstvo, da na samo strukturo, in seveda s tem tudi na ciljno usmerjenost učnega
načrta kot osrednjega dokumenta za pouk geografije, vplivajo različne interesne skupine (na primer
izobraževalna politika, pedagoške in geografske institucije, učitelji geografije, širša javnost) (Konečnik
Kotnik s sodelavci 2018). Zato je, kot sta zapisali Kolnikova in Konečnik Kotnikova (2010), končna struk-
tura učnega načrta vedno kompromisna rešitev.
Vendar pa je pri tem treba poudariti, da je prav učni načrt, kot temeljni dokument za pouk geo-
grafije v srednješolskem izobraževanju, v opredelitvi njegovega poslanstva oblikovan širše kot Predmetni
izpitni katalog in sicer tako, da po Lambertu (2003) učečega se »opolnomoči za življenje«, namen
Predmetnega izpitnega kataloga za maturo pa ima bistveno ožji pomen, ki je vezan na merjenje (ter tako
diferenciranje dijakov za nadaljnje šolanje) in še to le dela znanja in spretnosti, ki jih je dosegel (spet)
le del srednješolcev. In prav ta očitna nejasnost (ali pa morda namensko prezrta) namena obeh doku-
mentov se dobro odraža v mnenjih anketiranih učiteljev o »veliki uporabnosti« tistih elementov učnega
načrta in predmetnih katalogov, ki so operativni (koliko česa in kaj), ter »nizki uporabnosti« tistih struk-
turnih elementov, ki osmišljajo izobraževalno in vzgojno poslanstvo šolske geografije (didaktična
priporočila in opredelitev predmeta). Prav tako, bi se veljalo zamisliti tudi nad mnenji dela anketiranih
učiteljev geografije in njihovi strokovni opolnomočenosti, ki jim bi bil potencialni ožji učni načrt (na
»manj straneh«) in priročnik za poučevanje dobrodošel, ker bi potencialno prinesel »bistvene stvari« in
še najraje kalupe oziroma modele (izdelane učne priprave) za poučevanje, kar je bilo tudi moč prebrati
oziroma razbrati iz nekaterih razmišljanj. Si resnično želimo tovrstne uniformiranosti in poenostavlja-
nja, ki prezre raznolikost učečih se v njihovih zmožnostih in interesih, učnih okoljih in pogojih dela?
V Sloveniji je bila leta 2008 narejena zadnja prenova geografskih učnih načrtov po celotni vertika-
li, od osnovne šole do srednješolskega izobraževanja. Prenova je temeljila na enotnih nacionalnih izhodiščih,
kar naj bi omogočalo kontinuiteto med izobraževalnimi programi (Ivanuš Grmek s sodelavci 2009).
Kolnikova in Konečnik Kotnikova ugotavljata (2009), da so največje in stalno prisotne spremembe v geo-
grafskih učnih načrtih na primarni in sekundarni ravni izobraževanja predvsem spremembe na
področju geografskih učnih vsebin kot posledica velikih družbenopolitičnih sprememb, na katere se
je odzivala geografija kot znanstvena veda. Nacionalne izobraževalne smernice so prevladovale na področ-
ju strukture učnih načrtov ter v spremljajočih izobraževalnih filozofijah, medtem ko je bil vpliv geografske
vede do zdaj najizrazitejši na vsebinskem področju opredeljevanja prostorskih oziroma regionalnih enot
in načinu izobraževalnega proučevanja pokrajin (Kolnik in Konečnik Kotnik 2009).
Glede na povprečno desetletne intervale med prenovami učnih načrtov v Sloveniji je, upajmo, kmalu
pričakovati prenovo. Evalvacija obstoječih dokumentov, kot prvi od korakov procesa, se je pod okri-
ljem Zavoda Republike Slovenije za šolstvo sicer že začela decembra 2019. V procesu prenove bi morala
geografska stroka razumeti geografski kurikul, to je »celoten racionalni podstat vzgojno-izobraževalnega
programa institucije oziroma posameznega učitelja«, ki vključuje tudi subtilne dele kurikularnih spre-
memb in razvoja, ter predpostavljene principe, po katerih poteka učenje (Kelly 1989, 9–11), kot proces
in razvoj ter ga posledično smiselno nadgrajevati in približevati realnim potrebam udeleženih (na pri-
mer psihofizična razvojna stopnja, učne specifike, družbene okoliščine) v  (geografski) vzgoji in
izobraževanju ter dinamičnih družbenih razmerah (Konečnik Kotnik s sodelavci 2018).
6 Viri in literatura
Glej angleški del prispevka.
35
Geografski vestnik 92-1, 2020 Razprave/Papers
vestnik 92_1_vestnik 82_1.qxd  1.3.2021  9:33  Page 35