01
The framework
Ten lenses for noticing geographical difficulty
All ten challenges stay visible. Choose the closest lens, then select the classroom difficulty you are noticing.
01 / 10
Spatial Thinking
Diagnostic starting point
What are you noticing?
Choose an observation above.
The toolkit will help you work backwards from pupil performance to the geographical thinking that may need further teaching.
What you are noticing
02
In the classroom
You might hear…
You might see…
03
Why is this difficult?
Make the thinking visible
A simple model of the thinking
The representation is deliberately simplified: use it to discuss the shape of the thinking, not as a fixed recipe.
04
What can the geography teacher do?
These are possible responses rather than a checklist. Select and adapt the moves that best fit the pupil, the content and their current stage of learning.
Try this tomorrow
Watch out for…
From diagnosis to planning
Take this cognitive challenge into your lesson planning
Add a little lesson context and let the toolkit generate an AI-contextualised planning brief that applies this pathway to the geography you are about to teach. The brief supports your professional planning; it does not write the lesson for you.
AI contextualisationPrerequisite knowledgePlanning movesQuestionsChecks for understanding
Evidence base
Geography-specific, with wider learning science used carefully
The toolkit combines the ten-part Geography PGCE framework with geography-education guidance from Ofsted and the Geographical Association, alongside wider evidence on explicit instruction, disciplinary literacy and scaffolded practice. It deliberately explains both why a task may be cognitively demanding and how a teacher might respond.
Ofsted — Geography research review ↗
Ofsted — Getting our bearings ↗
Geographical Association — ITE guidance ↗
EEF — Secondary literacy ↗
AERO — Explicit instruction ↗
Diagnostic wording should be treated as a prompt for professional enquiry. The same pupil response may reflect more than one cognitive challenge, missing substantive knowledge, task design, language demands or other contextual factors.