Matching Geospatial Concepts with Geographic Educational Needs

Abstract

In this paper, we assume that learning to comprehend the geospatial environment would be significantly facilitated by developing a multi-level task ontology that identifies various levels and complexities of geospatial concepts. We suggest that, apart from four spatial 'primitives' -identity, location, magnitude, and space-time -all geospatial concepts involve 'inheritance' characteristics. The more complex and abstract the concept, the larger the inheritance links that need to be appreciated to enhance concept understanding. For example, many basic geospatial concepts -such as direction and distance -are first-order derivatives from the 'location' primitive, whereas concepts such as spatial association, map projection or interpolation are high-order concepts that require several layers of geospatial concepts in their derivation. Having offered a five-level ontology for concept organisation, we suggest sets of tasks that could establish an understanding of concepts, thus directly making the environment more legible in a spatial sense. We develop this framework in the context of the teaching of geography in grades from kindergarten to the final years of high school (grade 12 in the United States system). Our conceptualisation is grounded in the US school system -in which geography is usually absent in the curriculum.

Workshops and National Dissemination of Geographic Analysis in the Social Sciences: the CSISS Experience in the USA

“…By the second year of the SPACE workshops, more attention was given to the theoretical understanding of concepts of spatial thinking and less to the mastery of tools. This shift was expanded in subsequent years, coinciding with the publication of Learning to Think Spatially (National Research Council, 2006), and capturing a theme of growing interest in research and teaching, as seen in such recent publications as Gersmehl and Gersmehl (2007), Marsh et al (2007), Golledge et al (2008), Janelle and Goodchild (2009b), and Lee and Bednarz (2009).…”

Spatial Thinking and Technologies in the Undergraduate Social Science Classroom

“…A third and final way the Committee on Support for Thinking Spatially describes spatial thinking involves breaking the process down into three component tasks: extracting spatial structures, performing spatial transformations, and drawing functional inferences. These and other researchers have also elaborated on various classifications for spatial thought (see Liben et al, 1981;Newcombe, 1989;Nyerges, 1991;Golledge, 2002;Tversky, 2005;Gersmehl & Gersmehl, 2007;Golledge et al, 2008aGolledge et al, , 2008b and provided insights into the development of spatial thinking.…”

Introducing Map Literacy Model of Learning

“…Individual cognitive processes are expected to occur and become experience as a preparation for the next stage. The map literacy skill developed at this stage belongs to primitive level [16]. In this stage, students are focused on answering the question related to the map, regarding "What to see?"…”