Browse All

Our response to this DfE consultation welcomes the prospect of increased flexibility in qualification delivery, and advocates for geographical knowledge and understanding.

The Department for Education sought views on whether proposed subject content will develop the digital skills needed for work and everyday life. Our response focused on the further development of spatial literacy and the use of digital map apps and websites.

Our written evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights calls for scrutiny of how geospatial data is collected and shared, and how this impacts privacy.

We argue for a broader understanding and subsequent assessment of knowledge exchange and collaboration. We also call for more attention to relative opportunities when determining clustering.

In our reponse to the DCMS consultation, we identify examples and opportunities for geospatial data use, advocate for geospatial training, and raise issues around personal privacy.

We reaffirm our commitment to a transition towards a sustainable open science/research ecosystem and offer reflections on the various open access models and business plans discussed in the consultation document. 

We strongly support the introduction of a ‘quality of education’ judgement and the publication of Ofsted subject reviews. We also comment on the wording of Intent, Implementation and Impact statements.

We support the aims of TEF but express concern that its metrics (including student satisfaction and employment outcomes) do not capture teaching excellence and do not explore nuances in localised provision.

In our response to the QAA consultation, we do not support the idea of an external advisor on academic standards, and note that proposed classification descriptors should be related to Subject Benchmark Statements.

We welcome proposals that facilitate fair, inclusive and transparent knowledge production, but urge more consideration of uneven impact on disciplines and advocate for hybrid journals, green open access and embargoes.

We recommend the inclusion of subject bodies as key information providers and highlight the Society's provision of subject choice advice.

Our response notes that draft standards do not sufficiently recognise important geographical digital skills and privacy issues around geospatial data.