terms were primarily spatial concepts and failed to capture the geospatial or geographic and environmental content that is the emphasis of their own teaching.
For example, concepts important to geography teaching and yet not explicitly mentioned on the list, include place, direction, spatial pattern and diffusion. In addition, some teachers suggested that the survey tended to overemphasize con- cepts rather than the application and skills in map reading, geographical thinking, environmental interpretation and the framing of geographical questions.
14.4.3 Challenges to Geospatial Assessment
The main challenge to geospatial assessment, as reported by 84 % of respondents, is the lack of teacher training in such practices. A smaller proportion (50 %) reported a lack of awareness of available geospatial assessment instruments. Lack of access to technologies and resources, was reported as a challenge by less than half the teachers, although this remains a significant barrier in some school districts, especially those outside of North America. A challenge, previously noted, is that in many districts geospatial thinking is not an explicit dimension of the local curricula. Another is that existing assessment instruments typically have been designed for particular geographic contexts and require customization to the local curriculum and local geography.
Another challenge to the more widespread application of geospatial assessment instruments is the need for their adaptation to the local curriculum and local geography. The publication of further applications and refinements to the existing assessments would provide useful examples for educators in a variety of contexts.
In general, survey respondents report a positive trend which is that in many districts curricular reforms are placing increased emphasis on geospatial reasoning.
However, this survey also suggests that there has been less attention given to the development of instruments and practices for the assessment of student learning outcomes. This offers an opportunity for action. The authors recognize that GSTs and applications provide a versatile platform for teaching and learning. Although such technologies may not always improve student achievement, they may be useful to enhance student motivation.
Looking ahead, the authors recommend that new tools be developed to assess the use of geospatial thinking practices. As suggested by the survey, the chief obstacle to the majority of respondents is their lack of awareness of the current strategies and instruments available to assess geospatial thinking. Computers have become a common way for teachers to demonstrate and develop mapping skills. This suggests the potential for online mapping platforms (e.g., ArcGIS Online), along with smartphone and tablet applications to become a means for teachers to access and further refine assessment instruments for geospatial thinking in different educa- tional settings.
Assessment is an integral component of education, connected to teaching and learning. The types of assessments found in geography teaching materials generally focus on declarative knowledge, include few geographic practices, are primarily multiple-choice format, and use a map/globe as the type of representation or none at all. To enhance educator awareness of geospatial thinking assessment it will be vital to build capacity in the geographic education community. A recent effort in this direction is the road Map for 21st Century Geography Education Project. Each of its three reports highlights key recommendations for a different audience. Teachers who are interested in creating geospatial thinking assessments may want to examine theAssessment report (Edelson et al.2013), which addresses key considerations, and provides a framework for designing geography assessments. For textbook and curriculum developers, the Instruction materials and professional development report (Schell et al. 2013) is rich with support materials where assessment tools may fit. Researchers will find that the third report,Geography education research (Bednarz et al.2013) outlines ideas for advancing geographic education including recommendations for research in the area of assessment.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the educators who responded to the survey and shared their insights and experiences. Appreciation is also extended to reviewers and editors for their thoughtful feedback.
178 B. Sharpe and N.T. Huynh
References
Albert, W. S., & Golledge, R. (1999). The use of spatial cognitive abilities in geographical information systems: The map overlay operation.Transactions in GIS, 3(1), 7–21.
Baker, T. R., Palmer, A. M., & Kerski, J. J. (2009). A national survey to examine teacher professional development and implementation of desktop GIS.Journal of Geography, 108 (4), 174–185.
Battersby, S., & Kessler, F. C. (2012). Cues for interpreting distortion in map projections.Journal of Geography, 111(3), 93–101.
Battersby, S., & Montello, D. R. (2009). Area estimation of world regions and the projection of the global scale cognitive map. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(2), 273–291.
Battersby, S., Golledge, R., & Marsh, M. (2006). Incidental learning of geospatial concepts across grade levels: Map overlay.Journal of Geography, 105(4), 139–146.
Bednarz, S. W., Heffron, S., & Huynh, N. T. (Eds.). (2013). A road map for 21st century geography education: Geography education research(A report from the assessment commit- tee of the road map for 21st century geography education project). Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.
Bein, F. L., Hayes, J. J., & Jones, T. G. (2009). Fifteen year follow-up geography skills test administered in Indiana, 1987 and 2002.Journal of Geography, 108(1), 30–36.
Cross, J. A. (1987). Factors associated with students’ place location knowledge. Journal of Geography, 86(2), 59–63.
Dummer, T. J. B., Cook, I. G., Parker, S. L., Barrett, G. A., & Hull, A. P. (2008). Promoting and assessing‘Deep Learning’in geography fieldwork: An evaluation of reflective field diaries.
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32(3), 459–479.
Dunn, J. M. (2011). Location knowledge: Assessment, spatial thinking, and new National Geog- raphy Standards.Journal of Geography, 110(2), 81–89.
Edelson, D. C., Shavelson, R. J., & Wertheim, J. A. (Eds.). (2013).A road map for 21st century geography education: Assessment(A report from the assessment committee of the road map for 21st century geography education project). Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.
France, D., & Ribchester, C. (2004). Producing websites for assessment: A case study from a level 1 fieldwork module.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 28(1), 49–62.
Golledge, R., Marsh, M., & Battersby, S. (2008). A conceptual framework for facilitating geospatial thinking.Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(2), 285–308.
Hegarty, M., Richardson, A. E., Montello, D. R., Lovelace, K., & Subbiah, I. (2002). Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability.Intelligence, 30(5), 425–447.
Hooey, C. A., & Bailey, T. J. (2005). Journal writing and the development of spatial skills.Journal of Geography, 104(6), 257–261.
Hupy, J. P. (2011). Teaching geographic concepts through fieldwork and competition.Journal of Geography, 110(3), 131–135.
Huynh, N. T., & Sharpe, B. (2013). An assessment instrument to measure geospatial thinking expertise.Journal of Geography, 112(1), 3–17.
Jo, I., & Bednarz, S. W. (2011). Textbook questions to support spatial thinking: Differences in spatiality by question location.Journal of Geography, 110(2), 70–80.
Jo, I., Bednarz, S., & Metoyer, S. (2010). Selecting and designing questions to facilitate spatial thinking.Geography Teacher, 7(2), 49–55.
Kastens, K. A., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Eliciting self-explanations improves children’s performance on a field-based map skills task.Cognition and Instruction, 25(1), 45–74.
Kemp, J., Mellor, A., Kotter, R., & Oosthoek, J. W. (2012). Student-produced podcasts as an assessment tool: An example from geomorphology.Journal of Geography in Higher Educa- tion, 36(1), 117–130.
Kim, M., & Bednarz, R. (2013). Effects of a GIS course on self-assessment of Spatial Habits of Mind (SHOM).Journal of Geography, 112(4), 165–177.
14 A Review of Geospatial Thinking Assessment in High Schools 179
Lanca, M., & Kirby, J. R. (1995). The benefits of verbal and spatial tasks in contour map learning.
Cartographic Perspectives, 21, 3–15.
Lee, J. (2005).Effect of GIS learning on spatial ability. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University.
Lee, J., & Bednarz, R. (2009). Effect of GIS learning on spatial thinking.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(2), 183–198.
Liben, L. S., & Yekel, C. A. (1996). Preschoolers’understanding of plan and oblique maps: The role of geometric and representational correspondence.Child Development, 67(6), 2780–2796.
Madsen, L. M., & Rump, C. (2012). Considerations of how to study learning processes when students use GIS as an instrument for developing spatial thinking skills.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(1), 97–116.
McGuinness, M. (2009). Putting themselves in the picture: Using reflective diaries in the teaching of feminist geography.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33(3), 339–349.
Miller, J., Keller, C. P., & Yore, L. D. (2005). Suggested geographic information literacy for K-12.
International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 14(4), 243–250.
Montello, D. R., Lovelace, K. L., Golledge, R. G., & Self, C. M. (1999). Sex-related differences and similarities in geographic and environmental spatial abilities.Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 89(3), 515–534.
Olson, J. M. (2006). Map projections and the visual detective: How to tell if a map is equal area, conformal, or neither.Journal of Geography, 105(1), 13–32.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2013).The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 9 and 10, Canadian and World Studies(Rev.). Toronto: Queen’s Printer.
Schell, E. M., Roth, K. J., & Mohan, A. (Eds.). (2013).A road map for 21st century geography education: Instructional materials and professional development(A report from the assess- ment committee of the road map for 21st century geography education project). Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.
Scholz, M. A., Huynh, N. T., Brysch, C. P., & Scholz, R. W. (2014). An evaluation of university world geography textbook questions for components of spatial thinking.Journal of Geogra- phy, 113(5), 208–219.
Turner, S., & Leydon, J. (2012). Improving geographic literacy among first-year undergraduate students: Testing the effectiveness of online quizzes.Journal of Geography, 111(2), 54–66.
Warkentin, T. (2011). Cultivating urban naturalists: Teaching experiential, place-based learning through nature journalizing in Central Park.Journal of Geography, 110(6), 227–238.
Wehry, S., Monroe-Ossi, H., Cobb, S., & Fountain, C. (2012). Concept mapping strategies:
Content, tools, and assessment for human geography.Journal of Geography, 111(3), 83–92.
180 B. Sharpe and N.T. Huynh
Part V
Trends and Recommendations
Chapter 15
Opportunities and Challenges in Using Geospatial Technologies for Education
Joseph J. Kerski
Abstract Opportunities in using geospatial technologies as a meaningful and sustained part of education exist as never before. Most obvious are technological opportunities, centered on the evolution of GST to a web-based platform, including editable online maps that can be customized, analyzed, and shared on any device.
Geospatial skills and approaches can be effectively taught in an ever-growing variety of face-to-face and online platforms such as Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs). But equally important are opportunities in education that focus attention on inquiry, critical thinking, outdoor education, authentic assess- ment, STEM, technical, green, and other careers, and meaningful teaching with technology. Societal trends offer unprecedented opportunity to use GST in educa- tion. These include location analytics that are embedding a positional component in everyday electronic devices, a growing awareness of the geographic significance of key twenty-first century issues, such as biodiversity, urbanization, food, hazards, water, human health, and others, and the increasing role seen for citizen science in solving problems.
Despite these opportunities, technological, pedagogical, and administrative issues still pose challenges. Technological challenges include Internet bandwidth, spatial data availability and permissions, and cost for software as a service. Peda- gogical challenges include teaching with rapidly evolving web GST tools and a lack of a “home” for and awareness of geospatial technologies and spatial thinking in the curriculum. Administrative issues such as competition for educational class time and funding pose additional challenges. Nevertheless, geospatial technologies as a
“transformational technology” could very well be poised to make a significant positive impact on education and society.
Keywords Opportunities • Challenges • Inquiry
J.J. Kerski (*)
Esri, Redlands, CA, USA
The University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA e-mail:[email protected]
©Springer Japan 2015
O. Mun˜iz Solari et al. (eds.),Geospatial Technologies and Geography Education in a Changing World, Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences, DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-55519-3_15
183