Click for next page ( 28


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 27
2 Education and Curriculum Needs in GIS/GIScience G eographic information systems (GIS) and geographic information science (GIScience) demand new skills and knowledge. Profes- sionals trained in traditional curricula in such departments as ge- ography, civil engineering, and computer science fail to develop insights into the critical linkages among these disciplines that are needed by today's GIScience professionals. Consequently, curricular and structural changes should be integral components of plans to produce the GIS/ GIScience professionals who are in such short supply. Moreover, it may be desirable to take formal steps to ensure consistency and quality in their preparation. Education in new specialties cannot be separated from the research that underlies it, and as is true of any new intellectual enterprise, geographic information systems and geographic information science present new challenges across the pedagogical spectrum from applica- tions to fundamental geographic and cartographic theory. GIS/GISCIENCE TRAINING AND EDUCATION NEEDS Maps play critical roles in any discipline that investigates phenomena dispersed over Earth's surface. Hence, anthropologists, ecologists, epide- miologists, foresters, geographers, geologists, meteorologists, and scien- tists in many other disciplines make extensive use of maps and engage in mapping. Anatomists, astronomers, genomicists, physiologists, and other scientists who use spatial perspectives also find maps invaluable in their work at scales less than or beyond those normally found in geographic mapping. Technology and the growing use of spatial analysis ensure con- 27

OCR for page 27
28 BEYOND MAPPING tinued rapid growth of mapping in the decades to come (Hall, 1992). Be- cause maps are such essential tools, students should learn about them as part of their preparation as scientists, and many do in response to the growing value of GIS skills in the job market. With widespread adoption of GIS as a tool for environmental management, planning, and spatial decision support, GIS courses are now routinely offered as service courses on many campuses, and are increasingly required in programs in Earth science disciplines. Looking toward the future, informed citizens will need to use and understand the outputs of geographic information systems and the rudiments of geographic information science. How else will commu- nities be able to make sound decisions about smart growth, environmen- tal preservation, adequate water and sewage systems, and similar issues? Across the spectrum of GIS/GIScience competence (Sidebar 2-1), ranging from public awareness at the most elementary level to geographic SIDEBAR 2-1 Seven Levels of GIS Competence Seven levels of GIS competence are, in ascending order: 1. Public awareness of GIS and its uses; 2. Basic spatial and computer understanding; 3. Routine use of basic GIS software; 4. Higher-level modeling applications of GIS; 5. Design and development of GIS applications; 6. Design of geographic information systems; and 7. GIS research and development. Undergraduate degree programs should foster competence in all col- lege and university graduates in the first two levels regardless of discipline owing to the pervasive use of GIS. Students interested in employment in agencies or firms that use GIS should be competent at level 3 in order to use commercial off-the-shelf software. Level 4 requires abilities in spatial analysis, computer programming, and database management. Competence in software engineering must be added to fulfill level 5 responsibilities. Level 6 workers must also acquire advanced analytical and technical skills, including systems analysis, database design and development, user inter- face design, and programming. Level 7 professionals are capable of lead- ing research and development teams in government agencies, at software vendors, and in colleges and universities. SOURCE: DiBiase et al., 2006; Marble, 1997.

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 29 information science research and development at the most advanced (the order does not necessarily imply hierarchy or progression), the number of professionals trained at levels 2-4 in the sidebar has expanded rapidly. The supply of graduates prepared to assume levels 5-7 responsibilities, however, continues to fall further behind the numbers needed (Marble, 1997). While GIScience education was maturing, several concerns arose re- garding its evolution: 1. Members of the GIScience community have questioned whether academic training provides the depth of understanding needed to serve the rapidly growing profession (Wikle, 1999). 2. Another concern has been achieving an appropriate balance be- tween learning software and understanding the foundation concepts needed to use geographic information systems intelligently (Marble, 1997). There is widespread uneasiness about "button pushers who know cookbook applications but are unable to work through a problem from start to finish" (Gober et al., 1995, 1997, p.216). Some GIS courses are too focused on software at the expense of the critical concepts and habits of mind required for the effective practice of evolving mapping science. 3. GIScience coursework has crowded the already full course loads of university students. As a result, many graduates now take fewer courses in their majors and fewer courses (such as statistics) needed for work- place success. 4. The methods used to teach GIScience have not been sufficient to meet the growing need for mapping science professionals, and attention should be given to improving GIScience pedagogy (Paul, 2004). In recent years, as GIS/GIScience organizations have worked to iden- tify the important thrusts for research and standardization of the curricu- lum, there has been a proliferation of applicable books and journals. In fact, a search of Amazon.com found more than 2,503 entries for "geo- graphic information systems." One of the most complete listings of GIS materials is maintained at the Virtual Campus Library of the Environ- mental Systems Research Institute (http://campus.esri.com/campus/li- brary/bibliography/ [accessed 24 May 2006]), which provides a useful breakdown of the 147 books listed on its site: business (4), cartography (13), data and databases (13), education (3), environment (9), geography and social sciences (5), geostatistics (8), government (14), health (2), intro- duction to GIS (29), managing GIS (6), philosophy and design (6), remote sensing (5), software tutorials (18), spatial analysis (4), standards (2), and technical issues (6). Moving beyond the basic ability to use commercial off-the-shelf

OCR for page 27
30 BEYOND MAPPING software requires the ability to visualize, analyze, manipulate, transform, and interpret geospatial information (skills more advanced than those needed for advanced word processing), capabilities that are comparable in conceptual complexity to those taught in statistics courses. Curriculum designers in the disciplines that employ GIS face questions familiar to those who dealt in an earlier era with the need for students to acquire statistical skills--should they be taught by statistics faculty or should the skills be taught by specialists within the subject department itself? To date, no clear consensus on this recent incarnation of a hoary question has emerged in the country's colleges and universities, so a variety of pre- dominantly ad hoc arrangements are in place. NEW CURRICULAR CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES Since the late 1980s, academic experts at leading research universities have initiated a series of undergraduate curriculum planning projects in- tended to increase the supply of qualified graduates in GIScience. Interest in such curricula among four-year institutions has waned even as the ini- tiatives have grown increasingly ambitious. Meanwhile, workforce devel- opment specialists have attempted to identify the roles that geospatial technology professionals are expected to play, and the competences re- quired for success in those roles. The National Science Foundation's 1987 solicitation for a National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA) included as one of its four goals "to augment the nation's supply of experts in GIS and geographic analysis in participating disciplines" (NSF, 1987). In 1988, shortly after receiving the National Science Foundation award, the NCGIA consortium developed "a detailed outline for a three-course sequence of 75 one-hour units" (Goodchild and Kemp, 1992, p.310). Fifty leading scholars and practitioners were recruited to prepare draft units. More than 100 institutions worldwide agreed to implement the resulting three-course sequence (introduction to GIS, technical issues in GIS, and application issues in GIS) and to share assessment data with the NCGIA. Lecture notes and laboratory exercises were revised extensively in response to user com- ments and subsequently published in July 1990 as the NCGIA Core Cur- riculum (Coulson and Waters, 1991). The Core Curriculum print version was requested by over 1,500 institutions and translated into several lan- guages. In 1995, the NCGIA announced plans to develop a revised and expanded New Core Curriculum in GIScience to incorporate new devel- opments. The revised curriculum was to include at least 176 hour-long units. One-third of the planned units were completed over a four-year period, but the project was abandoned in 2000, because the need for it waned within the higher education community owing to the rapid spread

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 31 of GIS instruction in North American educational institutions and the pro- liferation of commercially published textbooks on GIS/GIScience.1 In 2001, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mobilized a team of workforce development specialists at the University of Southern Mississippi to investigate the needs of the geospatial indus- try. The Geospatial Workforce Development Center (GWDC) convened workshops involving representatives of 16 leading businesses, govern- ment agencies, and professional societies. Using focus group and group systems methodologies, researchers asked representatives to identify the key skills that successful employees master and the professional roles they are expected to play. The GWDC identified 12 salient roles fulfilled by GIS/GIScience professionals (Table 2-1), and it derived 39 basic competences on which those skills are based, organized under four ma- jor headings: Technical, Business, Analytical, and Interpersonal Com- petences (Table 2-2). Though not wholly comprehensive (intellectual and privacy questions are not included, for example), the list is a sound start- ing point. The Model Curricula initiative of the University Consortium for Geo- graphic Information Science (UCGIS) is the latest in a series of national attempts to identify the knowledge and skills needed for success in geospatial technology professions. The related UCGIS Body of Knowl- edge provides a detailed taxonomy of topics that should be included in any comprehensive GIScience curriculum (Table 2-3). For each unit entry, the Body of Knowledge provides a set of tasks that should be included within the unit. For example the unit on "Elements of Geographic Infor- mation" would include a discussion of discrete entities, events and pro- cesses, fields in space and time, and integrated models (Sidebar 2-2). As befits a recently developed specialty, most concern for GIS/ GIScience training to date has focused on higher education. The utility of GIS for many tasks and the need for citizens capable of using it for daily tasks will soon make incorporation of GIS into secondary and even pri- mary school curricula a greater concern. Where GIS is currently taught in kindergarten through grade 12 (less than 1 percent of all students), in- struction is dominated by the software provided by a single vendor--the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). Although recent issues of ESRI software are much more user-friendly than earlier versions, the full featured desktop GIS software is designed for use by professionals, not novices. Considerable progress is being made by the vendors to create 1A remote sensing core curriculum project was undertaken under the auspices of the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (Estes et al., 1993; Foresman et al., 1997).

OCR for page 27
32 BEYOND MAPPING TABLE 2-1 Twelve Roles Played by Geospatial Technology Professionals as Identified by the Geospatial Workforce Development Center Role Description Applications development Identify and develop tools and instruments to satisfy customer needs Data acquisition Collect geospatial and related data Coordination Interorganizational facilitation and communication Data analysis and interpretation Process data and extract information to create products, drive conclusions, and inform decision- making reports Data management Catalog, archive, retrieve, and distribute geospatial data Management Efficiently and effectively apply the company's mission using financial, technical, and intellectual skills and resources to optimize the end products Marketing Identify customer requirements and needs, and effectively communicate those needs and requirements to the organization, as well as promote geospatial solutions Project management Effectively oversee activity requirements to produce the prescribed outcomes on time and within budget Systems analysis Assess requirements to produce the desired outcomes on time and within budget Systems management Integrate resources and develop additional resources to support spatial and temporal user requirements Training Analyze, design, and develop instructional and noninstructional interventions to provide transfer of knowledge and evaluation for performance enhancement Visualization Render data and information into visual geospatial representations NOTE: Roles were defined as subsets of 39 particular competences (Table 2-2). Competences rated as "important" by at least 50 percent of role experts were deemed core competences. SOURCE: Gaudet et al., 2003, p. 25. customized desktop and Web-based applications that simplify interaction, thereby flattening the learning curve and becoming more cost-effective in classroom settings. GIS competence, however, is not a component of teacher training in most colleges and universities; the few elementary and secondary school teachers who offer GIS instruction typically have taken ESRI courses (NRC, 2006a). Compounding these impediments and con- straints, GIS equipment is costly and expensive to maintain, especially at

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 33 TABLE 2-2 Thirty-Nine Competences Required for Success in Geospatial Technology Professions as Identified by GWDC TECHNICAL COMPETENCES Ability to assess relationships among geospatial technologies Cartography Computer programming skills Environmental applications GIS theory and applications Geological applications Geospatial data processing tools Photogrammetry Remote sensing theory and applications Spatial information processing Technical writing Technological literacy Topology BUSINESS COMPETENCES Ability to see the "big picture" Business understanding Buy-in/advocacy Change management Cost-benefit analysis and ROI Ethics modeling Industry understanding Legal understanding Organizational understanding Performance analysis and evaluation Visioning ANALYTICAL COMPETENCES Creative thinking Knowledge management Model-building skills Problem-solving skills Research skill Systems thinking INTERPERSONAL COMPETENCES Coaching Communication Conflict management Feedback skills Group process understanding Leadership skills Questioning Relationship building skills Self-knowledge/self-management NOTES: Each professional role listed in Table 2-1 requires a subset of the technical, analyti- cal, business, and interpersonal competences listed here; Boldface type indicates competences identified as core competences by GWDC; GI S&T = geographic information science and technology; GWDC = Geospatial Workforce Development Center. SOURCE: Gaudet et al., 2003.

OCR for page 27
34 BEYOND MAPPING TABLE 2-3 Knowledge Areas and Units from the UCGIS GI S&T Body of Knowledge 2006 Knowledge Area AM, Analytical Methods Unit AM1 Academic and analytical origins Unit AM2 Query operations and query languages Unit AM3 Geometric measures Unit AM4 Basic analytical operations Unit AM5 Basic analytical methods Unit AM6 Analysis of surfaces Unit AM7 Spatial statistics Unit AM8 Geostatistics Unit AM9 Spatial regression and econometrics Unit AM10 Data mining Unit AM11 Network analysis Unit AM12 Optimization and location-allocation modeling Knowledge Area CF, Conceptual Foundations Unit CF1 Philosophical foundations Unit CF2 Cognitive and social foundations Unit CF3 Domains of geographic information Unit CF4 Elements of geographic information Unit CF5 Relationships Unit CF6 Imperfections in geographic information Knowledge Area CV, Cartography and Visualization Unit CV1 History and trends Unit CV2 Data considerations Unit CV3 Principles of map design Unit CV4 Graphic representation techniques Unit CV5 Map production Unit CV6 Map use and evaluation Knowledge Area DA, Design Aspects Unit DA1 The scope of GI S&T system design Unit DA2 Project definition Unit DA3 Resource planning Unit DA4 Database design Unit DA5 Analysis design Unit DA6 Application design Unit DA7 System implementation Knowledge Area DM, Data Modeling Unit DM1 Basic storage and retrieval structures Unit DM2 Database management systems Unit DM3 Tessellation data models Unit DM4 Vector and object data models Unit DM5 Modeling 3D, temporal, and uncertain phenomena Knowledge Area DN, Data Manipulation Unit DN1 Representation transformation Unit DN2 Generalization and aggregation Unit DN3 Transaction management of geospatial data

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 35 TABLE 2-3 Continued Knowledge Area GC, Geocomputation Unit GC1 Emergence of geocomputation Unit GC2 Computational aspects and neurocomputing Unit GC3 Cellular automata models Unit GC4 Heuristics Unit GC5 Genetic algorithms Unit GC6 Agent-based models Unit GC7 Simulation modeling Unit GC8 Uncertainty Unit GC9 Fuzzy sets Knowledge Area GD, Geospatial Data Unit GD1 Earth geometry Unit GD2 Land partitioning systems Unit GD3 Georeferencing systems Unit GD4 Datumsa Unit GD5 Map projections Unit GD6 Data quality Unit GD7 Land surveying and GPS Unit GD8 Digitizing Unit GD9 Field data collection Unit GD10 Aerial imaging and photogrammetry Unit GD11 Satellite and shipboard remote sensing Unit GD12 Metadata, standards, and infrastructures Knowledge Area GS, GI S&T and Society Unit GS1 Legal aspects Unit GS2 Economic aspects Unit GS3 Use of geospatial information in the public sector Unit GS4 Geospatial information as property Unit GS5 Dissemination of geospatial information Unit GS6 Ethical aspects of geospatial information and technology Unit GS7 Critical GIS Knowledge Area OI, Organizational and Institutional Aspects Unit OI1 Origins of GI S&T Unit O2 Managing the GI system operations and infrastructure Unit OI3 Organizational structures and procedures Unit OI4 GI S&T workforce themes Unit OI5 Institutional and interinstitutional aspects Unit OI6 Coordinating organizations (national and international) NOTE: Boldface type indicates units identified as core units by DiBiase et al. (2006). aA reference datum is a known and constant surface which can be used to describe the location of unknown points. On Earth, the normal reference datum is sea level. SOURCE: DiBiase et al., 2006. Reprinted with permission from the Association of American Geographers.

OCR for page 27
36 BEYOND MAPPING SIDEBAR 2-2 UCGIS Body of Knowledge Unit CF4: Elements of Geographic Information The concepts below form the basic elements of common human con- ceptions of geographic phenomena. Concepts from many units in this knowledge area have been synthesized to create general conceptual mod- els of geographic information. Attempts to resolve the object-field debate have led to attempts to create comprehensive models that bridge these views. Consideration of this unit should also include formal models of these elements in mathematics and other fields. Knowledge area "DM Data Modeling" discusses the representation of these elements in digital models. Topic CF4-1 Discrete Entities Discuss the human predilection to conceptualize geographic phe- nomena in terms of discrete entities; Describe particular entities in terms of space, time, and properties; Describe the perceptual processes (e.g., edge detection) that aid cognitive objectification; Compare and contrast differing epistemological and metaphysical viewpoints on the "reality" of geographic entities; Identify the types of features that need to be modeled in a particular GIS application or procedure; Identify phenomena that are difficult or impossible to conceptual- ize in terms of entities; Describe the difficulties in modeling entities with ill-defined edges; Describe the difficulties inherent in extending the tabletop meta- phor of objects to the geographic environment: - Evaluate the effectiveness of GIS data models for representing the identity, existence, and lifespan of entities; - Justify or refute the conception of fields (e.g., temperature, den- sity) as spatially intensive attributes of (sometimes amorphous and anonymous) entities; - Model "gray area" phenomena, such as categorical coverages (also called "discrete fields"), in terms of objects; and - Evaluate the influence of scale on the conceptualization of entities. Topic CF4-2 Events and Processes Compare and contrast the concepts of continuants (entities) and occurrents (events) Compare and contrast the concepts of event and process Describe particular events or processes in terms such as identity, categories, attributes, and locations;

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 37 Evaluate the assertion that "events and processes are the same thing, but viewed at different temporal scales"; Apply or develop formal systems for describing continuous spa- tiotemporal processes; Describe the actor role that entities and fields play in events and processes; and Discuss the difficulty of integrating process models into GIS soft- ware based on the entity and field views, and methods used to do so. Topic CF4-3 Fields in Space and Time Define a field in terms of properties, space, and time; Identify applications and phenomena that are not adequately mod- eled by the field view; Identify examples of discrete and continuous change found in spa- tial, temporal, and spatiotemporal fields; Differentiate various sources of fields, such as substance properties (e.g., temperature), artificial constructs (e.g., population density), and fields of potential or influence (e.g., gravity); Formalize the notion of field using mathematical functions and cal- culus; Relate the notion of field in GIS to the mathematical notions of scalar and vector fields; Recognize the influences of scale on the perception and meaning of fields; Evaluate the representation of movement as a field of location over time [e.g. = f(t)]; and Evaluate the field view's description of objects as conceptual discretizations of continuous patterns. Topic CF4-4 Integrated Models Discuss the contributions of early attempts to integrate the con- cepts of space, time, and attribute in geographic information, such as Berry (1964) and Sinton (1978); - Illustrate major integrated models of geographic information, such as Peuquet's Triad, Mennis' Pyramid, and Yuan's Three-Domain; - Determine whether phenomena or applications exist that are not adequately represented in an existing comprehensive model; - Discuss the degree to which these models can be implemented using current technologies; and - Design data models for specific applications based on these comprehensive general models. SOURCE: DiBiase et al., 2006. Reprinted with permission from the Asso- ciation of American Geographers.

OCR for page 27
38 BEYOND MAPPING instructional laboratory scales. Confronting and resolving these obstacles to providing youngsters with basic GIS capabilities at an early age should be part of the profession's current and long-term plans for bolstering GIS/ GIScience. The conceptual and strategic ways GIS and GIScience can en- hance education, especially at the K-12 level but with more comprehen- sive implications, are covered in detail in NRC (2006a). ASSURING QUALITY IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING The general absence of standards and accountability for academic cer- tificate programs led one GIScience professional to note that "today any- body can teach anything and call it GIS education. . . . Who knows whether the skills being taught in these programs are needed to become a GIS professional?" (Huxhold, 2000, p.25). Another argued earlier that the "low-level, non-technical" character of undergraduate GIS education pro- duces graduates who are unprepared "to make substantial contributions to the ongoing development of GIS technology" (Marble, 1997, p.28). There remains considerable ambiguity regarding the qualifications of employees in GIScience. Surveying usually requires a license in order to practice. In fact, surveying is usually regulated by the same state board that oversees professional engineering. GIS and GIScience are largely un- regulated by states. The qualifications, apprenticeship requirements, and examinations needed to become qualified to be a professional surveyor are well defined and generally follow model laws developed by the Na- tional Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying. While most states do not license GIScience professionals, South Carolina recently ini- tiated a category of GIS surveyor. It remains to be seen whether other states will adopt similar requirements. A middle ground between a totally unregulated profession and one that is controlled by state licensure regulation is certification. As the UCGIS Body of Knowledge observes, "Certification is the process by which organizations award credentials to individuals who demonstrate certain qualifications and/or competencies." The American Society of Photogrammety and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) has operated a certifica- tion program for GIS for several years. In 2004 the Geographic Informa- tion Systems Certification Institute (GISCI) was created to provide sys- tematic oversight of certified geographic information systems (GIS) professionals who meet a set of minimum standards for ethical conduct and professional practice (http://www.gisci.org [accessed 24 May 2006]). More than 1,000 individuals now hold this level of certification. The aca- demic community has been concerned with developing qualified pro- grams that lead to undergraduate and graduate degrees. Several academic departments do offer certificate programs in GIS and related specialties.

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 39 The UCGIS Body of Knowledge provides a basis for determining sound content for certification processes (DiBiase et al., 2006). As of mid-2006, the demand for professional certification in GIS ap- pears to be broad, but not deep. Established accreditation mechanisms are not well suited to the undergraduate sector of the personnel infrastruc- ture, which is inherently multidisciplinary. An innovative approach to accreditation of individual courses and programs in the postgraduate sec- tor may become desirable as offerings proliferate. Portfolio-based certifi- cation does not assure individual competence, but may encourage con- tinuing professional development. ORGANIZATIONAL CHALLENGES Academic programs and structures change deliberatively, for sound reasons. Faculty members make long-term commitments to their special- ties, and colleges and universities make long-term commitments to fac- ulty members in the forms of tenure and institutional arrangements to organize their productivity. As a new set of ideas and skills with wide- spread applicability, GIS/GIScience has attracted the attention of a number of traditional academic disciplines (Figure 2-1). Originating in geography and cartography,2 GIS quickly attracted the interest of the photogrammetry and remote sensing, forestry, geological, and soil science communities, among others. In general, GIS/GIScience was in- herently and intuitively attractive to any specialty focused on geographi- cally dispersed resources, and demand for GIS software and profession- als who could use it grew rapidly in the public and private sectors. Because of its intrinsic reliance on computer technology and because it presented some novel intellectual and practical challenges, the computer science (and by extension electrical engineering) community also took up GIS/GIScience in the 1980s. Subsequently, a large number of distinct specialties and subdisciplines began to offer GIS courses and address problems in GIScience. Consequently, GIS/GIScience resides in a variety of departments on college and university campuses, most commonly in geography, but in other programs ranging, in all likelihood if a compre- hensive list were compiled, from anthropology to zoology (Figure 2-1). Beyond departments, many colleges and universities have instituted such supradepartmental structures as centers, institutes, interdisciplinary committees and programs, and joint faculty appointments to permit and promote collaboration among departments on topics of common interest. 2Roger Tomlinson coined the term "GIS" and put it into practice in Canada in 1963 (Tomlinson, 1997) prior to Ian McHarg's Design with Nature (1969).

OCR for page 27
40 BEYOND MAPPING FIGURE 2-1 The three subdomains comprising the GI S&T domain, in relation to allied fields. Two-way relations that are half-dashed represent asymmetrical con- tributions between allied fields. The image shows innovations pushing society beyond mapping into a far more versatile and powerful vision of mapping that draws on many additional sciences and technologies. SOURCE: DiBiase et al., 2006. Reprinted with permission from the Association of American Geographers. The effectiveness of such varying arrangements in meeting internal col- lege and university needs and the demand for GIS/GIScience profession- als varies from place to place. Faculty members may be reluctant to com- mit fully to GIS/GIScience if the specialty is not a core component of their disciplines, and students attracted to careers in GIS/GIScience may not be served best by programs that are or appear to be ad hoc in nature, second- ary in stature, or both. Among academic institutions, private institutions seem to have instituted structural changes more rapidly in response to the opportunities offered by GIS/GIScience, perhaps owing to greater flex- ibility to reprogram resources. Public colleges and universities have moved more slowly, owing perhaps to their generally larger sizes and stronger tradition of sharing governance between faculty and administra- tors (with notable exceptions, such as the University of Texas at Dallas [Sidebar 1-5]). For-profit academic institutions, less tied to traditional cur- ricula and organizational forms, are able and willing to respond quickly to student demand and the markets for their products. One example of

OCR for page 27
EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 41 private education moving to meet market needs was the two-day work- shop on "Unleashing the Power of GIS and GPS" offered at the 2006 an- nual meeting of the Association of American Geographers by Informa Learning (formerly TFI Learning), an international provider of specialist information and services for the academic, professional and business com- munities. This type of offering is likely to be imitated more frequently in the future.

OCR for page 27