The purpose of this short article is to offer a critical perspective on Larsen and Harrington's ambitious and stimulating review article. It does so by drawing a distinction between teaching and learning and discussing how progression metaphors for describing the latter can distort the moral purpose of the former. My response to the provocation…

This discussion of comparative international geographical education describes a three-phase educational typology based on political, economic, and cultural characteristics; man-land relationships; and geography as an academic discipline. A country's choice of educational emphasis reflects its prevailing political and social values. (AM)