GIS&amp;T Education and Training

Sinton, Diana Stuart; Kerski, Joseph J.

doi:10.22224/gistbok/2020.1.4

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By relating GIS learning outcomes to various geospatial competence models, the framework paves the way for competence‐based GIS education alluded to by Sinton and Kensky (2020). The framework underscores that both geospatial and non‐geospatial KSA are essential for GIS individuals to thrive and flourish in the geospatial industry and society in general.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many scholars, like Sui (1995), Clark, Monk, and Yool (2007), and Mathews and Wikle (2019), have looked at different instructional styles, strategies, and approaches for imparting GIS KSA to students. Recognizing that what works in one course, discipline, or institution may not necessarily work elsewhere due to student diversity, differential access to resources, and other factors, Sinton and Kensky (2020) cite DiBiase (2018) and note that “[a] one‐size‐fits‐all instructional model in GIS is not only futile but also outdated and unhelpful.” That said, there are two instructional strategies for achieving LAG and LWG processes put forward by Sui (1995, p. 581); that is, “teaching about GIS” (TAG) and “teaching with GIS” (TWG), respectively. The effectiveness of each strategy can vary by instructor and by education domain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The GIS BoK comes in many forms, with elements like GIS principles, practices, and implications on society (DiBiase et al., 2007; Sinton & Kensky, 2020; Wilson, 2014). The elements were initially distributed and available in course materials like textbooks, journal articles, software workbooks, and other (un)published multimedia (Johnson, 2019; Kemp, 2012).…”

Section: Gis Bok Course Objectives and Course Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a holistic framework for delivering quality GIS education within and across disciplines

Hodza

Berendsen

Hamerlinck

2021

Transactions in GIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current GIS education framework has gaps, undervalued elements, and decentralized components that make it difficult to effectively relate, teach, learn, and assess learning key constructs within and across disciplines. Building upon critical synthesis, analysis, and extension of multidisciplinary literature, we develop a student‐centered framework that places the 2D learning GIS space within the broader 3D educational space defined by cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains of learning. The modalities of GIS learning are discussed in the contexts of the “circle of GIS thinking,” “triangle of GIS practice,” and “triangle of affective GIS.” The framework suggests that well‐rounded GIS individuals possess hard and soft (non‐)geospatial knowledge, skills, and abilities gained through learning by thinking, doing, and feeling. It is coherent, intuitive, extensible, and in sync with modern GIS perspectives and knowledge, and multimodal ways of mastering this subject. We demonstrate how the framework informs design and content considerations for hybrid minds‐on, hands‐on, and “body‐on” classroom assessments that mirror the nature of GIS. We conclude that the framework shows considerable potential to facilitate consistent and persistent delivery of quality GIS education.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gis Bok Course Objectives and Course Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards a holistic framework for delivering quality GIS education within and across disciplines

Hodza

Berendsen

Hamerlinck

2021

Transactions in GIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this era, GIS and "GIScience" development and training became housed more ubiquitously in Geography departments, and several GIS-speci c journals were launched or expanded at this time (Waters, 2018). The UCGIS began to push for standardization in GIS training and used its popular annual meetings at venues for discussion of training standards (Sinton, 2017;Waters, 2013). In archaeology, several popular textbooks were published in this period, including Maschner (1996), Wescott and Brandon (1999), Wheatley and Gillings (2002), and Connoly and Lake (2006), as well as an important early edited volume (Lock & Stancic, 1995).…”

Section: A Timeline Of Gis Integration In Archaeological Theory and P...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Paradigm or Practice? Situating GIS in Contemporary Archaeological Method and Theory

Ullah,

Clow,

Meling

2023

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) has been used in archaeology for four decades, and colloquially appears to have become a main tool in the geospatial aspects of archaeological practice. In this paper, we examine temporal trends in the use and/or mention of GIS in archaeological publications (books and journal articles), conference presentations, and websites. We gathered data through keyword searches and with formal sampling surveys and conducted both quantitative and qualitative analyses to characterize the changing nature and intensity of GIS use in archaeology over time. We show how archaeological GIS-use has grown from a few early adopters of the 1980's, through a slow initial integration phase in the 1990's, to a punctuated set of two major expansions in the 2000's and 2010's. While we nd that basic use of GIS has grown to the point where it can be considered ubiquitous -if not universal -in the discipline, we also discovered that the major focus in archaeological GIS advancement is methodological rather than theoretical. We provide a historical context to this temporal pattern and identify ve roadblocks that we believe have hampered the development of a theory-rich archaeological GIS: 1) de ciencies in the archaeological GIS education model, 2) over-reliance on commercial software, 3) technical/technological barriers, 4) gaps in acceptance of GIS, and 5) the perception of GIS as "just a tool." We offer initial suggestions for ways forward to mitigate the effects of these roadblocks and build a more robust, theoretically sophisticated relationship with GIS in archaeology.Recent research into publishing trends in archaeology has elucidated issues of prestige and power inequities (Beck et al., 2021), gender and diversity (Bardolph, 2014;Fulkerson & Tushingham, 2019), and the growth of methodological specialties (Gaffney, 2008). In this paper, we focused on the ubiquity and character of GIS use within archaeology. We proceeded with a three-tiered approach to understanding GIS publication trends. The rst phase was designed to provide a baseline, coarse-grained overview of the general temporal trends of GIS usage within the discipline across a broad set of publication types and venues. The second phase examines trends and types of archaeological GIS usage at a ner, more detailed scale in a targeted subset of publication venues. The nal phase seeks to contextualize the results of the rst two phases and to provide a more nuanced understanding of how archaeologists have used, are using, and will continue to use GIS within the discipline.

show abstract

“…The availability of inexpensive microcomputer‐based software in the late 1980s, coupled with the emergence of textbooks and other instruction materials (see Kemp & Goodchild, 1992), assisted with the roll‐out of new GIS courses. With recognition of the value and utility of GIS, course enrollments grew rapidly and by the mid‐1990s, a few geography departments had established stand‐alone certificate programs (Sinton & Kerski, 2020). By the late 1990s, about 40 U.S. and Canadian colleges and universities offered a GIS certificate (Wikle, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The administration of academic GIS certificates: A survey of program coordinators

Wikle

Sinton

2020

Transactions in GIS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The academic GIS certificate has emerged as the most ubiquitous credential representing specialized knowledge and competency associated with geographic information systems, geographic information science, and related areas. While available at hundreds of public and private colleges and universities, GIS certificates are tremendously diverse in content, organization, and delivery. This article explores GIS certificates offered at U.S. institutions of higher education through an inventory of 385 certificate programs supplemented by in‐depth interviews of program faculty at 46 colleges or universities. Our findings are presented within larger themes tied to the quality, sustainability, and support of programs across topics that include marketing, curriculum design, delivery mode, faculty oversight, and institutional support.

show abstract

GIS&T Education and Training

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

Towards a holistic framework for delivering quality GIS education within and across disciplines

Towards a holistic framework for delivering quality GIS education within and across disciplines

Paradigm or Practice? Situating GIS in Contemporary Archaeological Method and Theory

The administration of academic GIS certificates: A survey of program coordinators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About