RGS × FT School Essay Competition: A Practical Guide

RGS × FT School Essay Competition: A Practical Guide

Editorial overview

The Royal Geographical Society runs the School Essay Competition in partnership with the Financial Times. It is a strong fit for students who enjoy geography as an argument rather than a memory exercise: the task rewards careful selection of evidence, a clear line of reasoning and the discipline to reach a conclusion within a tight format. That combination makes it useful for developing research and writing habits, but it is less suitable for someone hoping to assemble a polished entry in one hurried sitting.

The prompt gives entrants room to choose evidence and examples, yet that freedom is also the central difficulty. A successful response needs a controlled scope, a logical structure and enough time to test whether each source genuinely supports the argument. Preparation should therefore focus on thinking and revision, not on decorative presentation or collecting the largest possible number of facts.

Quick Facts

For current dates, eligibility and registration details, see the Royal Geographical Society × Financial Times School Essay Competition 2026 competition page.

This guide was checked on 22 August 2026.

---

Review Evaluation

Rated Expert. The main challenge is combining current evidence, geographical analysis and independent judgement in a concise essay or StoryMap.

What the question is really testing

The prompt asks students to examine why migration happens, how its patterns change and what consequences follow, while considering climatic factors and recent geopolitics. The wording contains several linked tasks. A response has to explain causes, show how patterns are changing and evaluate consequences, rather than treating migration as a single event with one explanation.

A practical first step is to turn the title into a working framework. One section might distinguish economic, political, demographic and environmental drivers. Another might examine how routes, destinations or forms of migration are changing. A concluding analytical section can compare consequences for migrants, origin regions and destination regions. The exact structure can vary, but every paragraph should help answer the same central question.

Climate and recent geopolitics should not be added as brief afterthoughts. They need to be integrated into the argument where the evidence makes them relevant. For example, a student might ask whether environmental pressures act alone or interact with conflict, employment, state policy and existing migration networks. The goal is not to cover every possible case; it is to make a defensible argument from a well-chosen set of examples.

A focused argument supported by a few well-understood examples is more persuasive than a catalogue of disconnected facts.

Essay or ArcGIS StoryMap?

Entrants may submit either an English-language essay or an open-access ArcGIS StoryMap of no more than 1,000 words, excluding the title and references. Both routes require geographical reasoning and referenced evidence. The choice should depend on how the student can communicate the argument most clearly, not on which format appears more impressive.

An essay is usually the cleaner option when the reasoning depends on comparison, nuance and sustained prose. It lets the writer control the order of claims and use maps or data selectively. A StoryMap can work well when spatial change is central and carefully chosen maps genuinely strengthen the analysis. It also introduces an extra practical requirement: the submitted link must remain open access so that judges can view it without requesting login details.

Before choosing, students should sketch the same argument in plain bullet points. If the visual sequence explains relationships that prose alone would obscure, a StoryMap may be worthwhile. If the map elements mainly decorate an argument that is already clear in writing, the essay route is likely to be more efficient.

Eligibility and the teacher submission route

Eligible students must be 16-18 and may be in the UK and overseas; they must also meet the organiser's geography-study requirement. The study requirement matters: this is not a general current-affairs writing contest for any student in the age band. Students should check the official terms with their geography teacher before investing substantial time in a draft.

A teacher submits the online form and uploads the student's work. The rules also allow One entry per student. This makes school coordination part of the process even when the research and writing are completed independently. Entrants should find out who will upload the work, what file or link format the school expects and when the teacher needs the finished version.

Entries are open, and the official deadline is 2026-11-09T17:00:00Z, which is 9 November 2026 at 5pm GMT. Treat that as the organiser's closing boundary, not the student's working cutoff. A sensible plan gives the teacher several school days for submission and leaves time to resolve a broken file, inaccessible StoryMap or missing word count.

👉 Ask the submitting teacher to confirm an internal cutoff before the main drafting period begins.

A preparation plan that protects the argument

A strong preparation process can be divided into four phases. The time spent on each phase will vary, but the order helps prevent the common problem of writing too early and then forcing unrelated research into an existing draft.

1. Define a precise position

Write a provisional answer to the question in one or two sentences. It can change as the evidence develops, but it should already identify the main relationship the entry will examine. A useful position is specific enough to guide source selection and flexible enough to accommodate evidence that complicates the initial view.

2. Build a small evidence table

For each possible case study or dataset, record the claim it supports, the source, its date, the geographical scale and one limitation. This makes it easier to spot when several sources repeat the same point or when an important claim has no reliable evidence. It also helps the student distinguish description from analysis.

3. Outline before drafting

Give every section a job. The introduction should define the interpretation of the question and state the direction of the argument. Each main paragraph should make one analytical claim, support it and explain why it matters. The conclusion should answer the question directly rather than introduce a new example.

4. Revise for reasoning and economy

On the first revision, test the logic: does each paragraph move the argument forward, and are alternative explanations treated fairly? On the second, test the evidence: are figures and examples current, relevant and properly referenced? Only then cut repetition, shorten sentences and check the word count.

What the judges are likely to notice

A panel including representatives of the Financial Times and Royal Geographical Society judges valid entries for evidence, clarity, conclusion, referenced sources and originality. These criteria reward a coherent piece of work, not merely a sophisticated vocabulary. Clear signposting helps, but the structure should serve the analysis rather than become a visible template.

Referencing is part of the argument because it allows the reader to distinguish evidence from assertion. Students should use Financial Times material where relevant, while also consulting other appropriate sources. A source earns its place by helping answer the question; it should not be included only to make the bibliography look longer.

The competition identifies Highly Commended entries. The winning entry is published on the Royal Geographical Society website and may also be published on FT.com. Those are meaningful outcomes, but they should not change the preparation strategy. The most useful goal is to produce a piece of geographical reasoning the student can explain and defend as their own work.

Common mistakes to avoid

❌ Starting with a huge topic and hoping the word limit will create focus.
✔ Choose a manageable comparison or set of cases before drafting.

❌ Treating causes, changing patterns and consequences as three unrelated mini-essays.
✔ Use a central argument that shows how the three parts interact.

❌ Adding maps, charts or statistics without explaining what they demonstrate.
✔ Follow each important piece of evidence with interpretation and a link back to the question.

❌ Leaving the upload process until the closing day.
✔ Agree a school cutoff and test the file or StoryMap link beforehand.

Key Takeaways

• Build one focused argument rather than trying to summarise migration everywhere.
• Use current evidence selectively and explain the limits of each source.
• Choose the essay or StoryMap format according to what best communicates the analysis.
• Plan around the teacher submission route, not only the organiser's stated closing time.
• Revise first for logic, then for evidence, and finally for concise expression.

Sources checked

• https://www.rgs.org/schools/competitions/school-essay-competition
• https://www.rgs.org/schools/competitions/school-essay-competition/terms-conditions/