Mercator or Equal Earth maps? It doesn't matter – schoolchildren should see them all

When teaching children about world geography, <source>it doesn't matter</source> whether they study Mercator or Equal Earth maps. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. Mercator maps maintain accurate positions and borders, making them useful for navigation. However, they distort the size of landmasses, especially near the poles. On the other hand, Equal Earth maps aim to minimize distortion of size, shape, and distance, but still sacrifice some accuracy near the poles.

As a teacher, I would display multiple maps and globes to give students a comprehensive understanding of the world. I would introduce the Mercator projection first, as it is widely used and maintains accurate borders. Then, I would introduce the Equal Earth map, highlighting its attempt to minimize distortion. Following that, I would show the Robinson projection, which is another good compromise between accuracy and visual appeal.

Lastly, I would display Goode's homolosine and the Equidistant Conic projection to illustrate different ways of displaying Earth's surface on a flat map.

It's important to explain that no map can perfectly represent Earth's round shape on a flat surface. Sacrifices must be made in order to display the globe accurately. By learning about these different projections, students can appreciate the complexities involved in mapmaking and develop a deeper understanding of the world around them. Ultimately, the goal should be to encourage curiosity and critical thinking about geography, rather than focusing on just one type of map.