Geospatial Concept Understanding and Recognition in G6–College Students: A Preliminary Argument for Minimal GIS

Abstract

As Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are increasingly implemented in K-12 classrooms, the risk becomes one of teaching "buttonlogy" or simply how to point and click to complete certain functions. Through the development of a geospatial concept lexicon and corresponding geospatial task ontology along with simple concept-based tasks completed by students in different grade levels, this research has illuminated grade-related differences in geospatial concept recognition and understanding. In these experiments, simple paper and pencil tasks were given to 6th grade, high school, and undergraduate students to provide insight into different levels of concept understanding, specifically in terms of grade related abilities to comprehend descriptions of spatial relationships. Results indicate significant differences in geospatial concept recognition, understanding, and use among the grade-based participants tested during the course of the project. These results can be used to inform the development of a "Minimal" GIS in which a pedagogic goal of grade-appropriate concept understanding becomes the driving force behind the GIS, suggesting the structure of an effective support system for spatial thinking.

Developing trainee teacher practice with geographical information systems (GIS)

“…It is widely proposed that spatial thinking skills can be developed with GIS (e.g. Akinyemi, 2016;Huynh 2009); it can empower students to think spatially (Lee and Bednarz, 2009), ask spatial questions (Nellis, 1994), visualise spatial data (Marsh, Golledge & Battersby, 2007), perform spatial analysis (Bednarz & van der Schee, 2006) and, thereby, to become active learners of geography.…”

A Research Agenda for Geospatial Technologies and Learning

“…However, empirical research in this area has been limited and of a narrow nature, such as a study that focuses on a single class or a one-time GST activity. For example, Marsh, Golledge, and Battersby (2009) found that sixth grade, high school, and college students all struggled with understanding particular spatial concepts that would inform effective GIS use, but such findings have neither been investigated further nor replicated with other students or concepts.…”

“…Effective evaluation instruments will be able to differentiate between testing students' ability to use GST software correctly and their ability to think geospatially (cf. Marsh, Golledge, and Battersby 2009;Bodzin et al 2014). It is one thing to be able to successfully perform analyses with GST, and entirely another to understand what the appropriate analysis method is, why it should be used, how the results help in understanding a spatial process or pattern, when or how the same type of spatial analysis could be used in situations without technological support, and whether improvement in spatial thinking ability is actually connected to GST use or other factors.…”

“…In fact, we have little information or guidance on best practices for how younger students learn GIS and other GST, and this leaves many areas open for research (Table 3). Some scholars suggest that GST learning benefits from informed sequencing of content (Howarth and Sinton 2011), while other studies indicate that software use should only follow traditional instruction of certain spatial principles (Golledge, Marsh, and Battersby 2008;Marsh, Golledge, and Battersby 2009). Yet empirical research to support these ideas is limited in scope and scale.…”

Teaching practical science online using GIS: a cautionary tale of coping strategies

“…The unenviable result was that the students followed a workflow in the software with no time to develop a deeper understanding of what they were doing or, indeed, why -a classic example of the "buttonology" approach (e.g. Bearman, Jones, André, Cachinho, & DeMers, 2016;Kerski, 2013;Marsh, Golledge, & Battersby, 2007) where mastering the software dominates the cognitive load (Sweller, 1988).…”