Chapter 4
Education for Spatial Citizenship
Thomas Jekel, Inga Gryl, and Uwe Schulze
Abstract This chapter deals with approaches to use geoinformation (GI) as used in everyday settings. It first explores the concept of Spatial Citizenship, along an example taken from the holiday crowd that is easily translated to a host of other interest groups using space as symbolic means to exert their interests. It then looks into the role that digital GI may play in that process, and fields of competences needed to use GI competitively for active / activist citizenship. Theoretical foun- dations of a coherent concept of Spatial Citizenship are discussed, as is the reception of the approach by the scientific community not involved in the original conception of the Spatial Citizenship approach. The second part of the paper is devoted to the development of a more formalized set of competences as well as a curriculum that should enable in-service teachers to teach their classes in secondary schools along the line of the Spatial Citizenship approach. The contribution finally gives an outline of the materials developed within a European Union Comenius project.
Keywords Geomedia • Citizenship education • Teacher training
digital GI may play in that process, and fields of competences needed to use GI competitively for active / activist citizenship. Theoretical foundations of a coherent concept of Spatial Citizenship are discussed, as is the reception of the approach by the scientific community not involved in the original conception of the Spatial Citizenship approach. The second part of the paper is devoted to the development of a more formalized set of competences as well as a curriculum that should enable in-service teachers to teach their classes in secondary schools along the line of the Spatial Citizenship approach. The contribution finally gives an outline of the materials developed within a European Union Comenius project.
4.1.1 Space and Citizenship
The ability to navigate society through being able to control specific dimensions of space is in no way new. Probably since the first world maps (Babylonian, Ptolemy), people would know about the importance of the whereabouts of places. To partic- ipate in society, we need systems to order things and phenomena in space, systems of representation of spatial phenomena, and systems of communicating and hiding meanings attached to space.
Let us look at an example that might look a little out of the way. Figure 4.1 shows a non-euclidic mapping of the Austrian ski area Hochfu¨gen-Hochzillertal provided by the local tourism industry. At first glance, this image allows to recollect the whereabouts of lifts and cable cars of ski runs, and other routes as well as stations to replenish visitors’energy at various ski huts. It includes a classification of the difficulty of various runs through a color code. This feature clearly allows to relate your personal abilities to the terrain (e.g. steepness of the slope). In turn it
Fig. 4.1 An online tourist map of the Hochzillertal-Hochfu¨gen ski area, Tyrol, Austria (Skiliftge- sellschaft Hochfu¨gen GmbH2014)
36 T. Jekel et al.
allows to identify yourself as sporty or leisure skier. The maplike representation also clearly denotes areas you are not supposed to ski, for example, private lands, young afforestation, areas meant for hunting or retreat of deer in the winter season and so on. Even this representation includes modes of control or at least attempts to control specific actions. The upper left corner denotes a specific area denoted as Fun Park on the map and inhabited by snow boarders. In reality, this area has several artificial jumps and a half pipe, rather loud and specific music, will cater to a specific age range of boarders wearing a specific fashion that transports some kind of cool sub-culture feel. The area exudes a deep group identity shown off by symbols and a language and vocabulary not used in other places. At the same time, there is a clear sense as to who does not belong to that area or group – ordinary skiers who are perceived as way uncool and who are actively shown as much. At the same time, the group of boarders making this little place their own, are no social group in the sense of at least semi-permanent links and social contacts – they usually hail from all corners of central Europe and dissolve in the evening or as soon as their holiday ends, sharing a (spare time) life style.
The above depiction of life within and belonging to a boarder park allows for quite a few glimpses that we deem characteristic of today’s citizenship and their connections to space:
– Citizenship is enacted through every day action within physical space. It includes acts of temporary appropriation of space.
– Citizenship is temporary and fluid, as ‘inhabitants’ disperse in time (in the evening or at the end of holidays)
– Citizenship is spatially referenced yet not physically or administratively bor- dered, but linked to everyday regionalization
– Citizenship relies on rules that are enforced by both symbolic as well as spatial means. Those rules may be discussed or changed, and are therefore subject evolution and revolution by both individuals and subgroups.
– Citizenship is embedded in (or fighting) both administrative regulations as well as the multi-million-Dollar business models of the tourism industry who care- fully tends to and makes money out of self-perceived sub cultures.
– Citizenship is including a sense of belonging to and identification with a group through symbolic, spatial and ideological means.
You may of course translate these basic ideas of citizenship from the heights of the Austrian Alps to a wider sphere of social entities and movements. Think of the
“Occupy movement” opposing current regulations of the finance industry who carries appropriation of space in its name, think of environmental or local initiatives – they all include a spatial reference and use it partly overt, partly implicit in their internal and external organization. The next question then is: How do modern media in general and geomedia in particular interact with this fluid conception of citizenship? And are there open ends secondary education has to address to enable students to successfully participate in multiple citizenships?
4 Education for Spatial Citizenship 37
4.1.2 Citizenship and Digital Spatial Information
Let us return to the original example. In reality, the above map of the skiing area is of course an interactive web tool. It provides a few added features indicating that citizenship may have changed with the advent of daily GI use.
First, underlying various infrastructure resources like lifts and ski runs is addi- tional information covering capacities, opening hours and technical information of the area. Second, the skiing area also provides you with an app based on GPS Data that allows you to easily document and share your achievements on the mountain.
As pointed out by Winkler et al. (2013) this not only allows you to help your self- esteem, but it also helps the cable car industry to actively collect data on your spatial behavior (e.g., regarding abilities, speed, feeding patterns, unlawful routes and so on). It is not the skiers only who appropriate their space, it is industry who appropriates the spatial data of the individual. Thus, the above-mentioned groups of skiers share their spatial footprint both along their abilities, as well as social norms they link into. The same as soon as we use our cell phones in everyday life, the data collection being enhanced by various apps.
It has to be said that there is nothing wrong with the sharing of spatial data.
However, it has to be made sure that (a) the collectors adhere to certain rules of use, as well as (b) the providers – the individual skier, and the individual mobile users in general – are aware of the fact and the ways in which the data might be used.
The use of geo-media also includes the active communication with spatial means, like geo-referenced text messages denoting location, panoramio, or place specific forums. These are used to document personal exploits to others, to docu- ment you are fitting in a specific lifestyle, and to communicate which places may be especially cool regarding that lifestyle.
The technical competences needed to work the above tools are minimal. More competences are needed regarding communication – including group-specific lan- guage – and visualization, i.e., how to produce *that* image of an ultra cool jump.
To sum up, the production of and communication with geomedia has become so easy that it has become ubiquitous and extensively used in everyday lives. In many cases, users do not even know they are using or producing geomedia. This is the situation the concept of education for Spatial Citizenship tries to address. The concept re-centers the use of geomedia in secondary education from a useful tool of science education to a tool to participate in society, and a tool to actively change. To support these aims, a very different approach to GI in secondary education is needed, including specific competence models for teachers and curricula for teacher training.
4.1.3 A Basic Concept of Spatial Citizenship
A spatial citizen should be able to interpret and critically reflect on spatial infor- mation, communicate with the assistance of maps and other spatial representations, and express location-specific opinions using geomedia.
38 T. Jekel et al.
When the term Spatial Citizenship was first introduced (Jekel and Gryl2010;
Gryl et al.2010), it was influenced by two major schools of theoretical tradition that can be rather closely linked together, Critical Cartography and Critical GIScience.
Both underline the function and power of maps (i.e., Harley1989; Wood 1993).
Transferring both into an educational setting informed by social geography and new cultural geography, the first argument therefore was:
Children make geographies
þGeographies need powerful visualizations þMaps are the most powerful visualizations
¼ Children make Maps
(Jekel2008).
The argument was close to a second strand of thought that developed through the reaction of GIScience to criticism mounted mainly by social science aware GIScientists (Pickles1995; Schuurman2000): They developed uses for Geographic Information Systems for participation (Elwood2006). While these systems were still heavily relying on expert knowledge, they made it a point to include lay knowledge in public decision making. The decision making, however was still largely oriented at formal spatial planning decisions and the spatial approach clearly linked to boundaries of administrative entities.
From these two entry points, the original model of competences to be acquired by students included three areas to be touched upon during secondary education (see Gryl and Jekel2012):
– A reduced set of technical competences regarding geoinformatics
– The ability to reflect on others spatial representations, as well as to reflect on one’s own geo-media use
– The ability to use spatial representations in communication and participation.