Possibilities withEduMapping

Frans I. Rip, Sept. 2010

Overview of this presentation

Problem statement / why EduMapping? EduMapping = Referencing Course Content GI BoK? (22%) Possibilities & deployment (review,

compare) Obstacles Future Summary

2

GI education and training comes in many shapes and sizes.

The ways to describe their contents are diverse too.

3

Problem 1: description diversity

Some parameters of content and description:• From 1 day course to 270 ects curriculum (= 4.5 years)• Focus on GI or embedded in application field• Language of teaching and description• Organization-prescribed format

Problem 2: subjectivity by role

Students before participation may see different content in the course description than intended by teaching staff (no example)

Students after participation

• may have changed their view from before participation (no example)

• may have a different view on course content than involved staff or uninvolved staff (example MdJ/Alex-RvL_GIMA)

4

GI-skilled outsiders may see different content in the course description than intended by teaching staff (example Painho/Orshoven-HB_GRS20306)

When reading a course description, Involved teaching staff may

• see other content than uninvolved staff (example RvL-FR_GIMA)

• have multiple individual views on the content of a course (example?)

projection metaphor:

imagine movie projection: - out of focus

- without screen http://www.beachhutmedia.com.au/news_2006.html

5

Summarized: variety in sources and reception: a communication obstacle

Describing GI courses with ‘free’ text is like the projection of an image through a bad lens and without a screen

EduMapping can help by providing a screen

EduMapping relates course content to an external reference and creates a LABEL

6

ASSESSMENT

EduMapping

GI BoK as a reference

BoK: UCGIS 2006 Hierarchy of KA’s, Units and Topics Masik 2010: 22% users of BoK in Europe (N=100

(113?)) USA (origin): no known survey

7

This label, added to course descriptions, should make GI education more transparent

8

A label for GI-content

Review your course or curriculum the BoK taxonomy as a checklist for teaching subjects

Quantified assessment: how is available time spent?makes attention distribution visible, comparable and debatable between all involved staff

(requires only local application of EduMapping)

Compare courses or curricula easier comparison by students between educational offerings by

different organizations (assuming they understand & come for content)

find out what the other organizations specialize in finding a niche for your curriculum in your region: we cover

subjects A, B and C, but we are THE specialists for subjects D & E

→ helps curriculum marketing

(possible when EduMapping is widely applied)

Possibilities & deployment

9

Review options

check intended content against GI BoK items (KA, Units, topics)

check quantitative profile against overall concept as formulated in the description (assessment by course / curriculum manager)

use assessments of the description by involved staff to identify points for discussion (bring hidden differences of opinion to the surface)

use assessments by post-participants and by GI-skilled but uninvolved outsiders to identify sources for different interpretations of the description.

10

Comparison options

compare total course/curriculum time spending to 4 subject categories: In-BoK, GI-but-not-in-BoK, Generic GI, not-GI

compare the profile of the In-BoK category of C/C: how much time for each Knowledge Area?

11

Obstacles for EduMapping

EduMapping: mapping between 2 fuzzy sets content descriptions are free format regarding

GI-content BoK-book : taxonomy on paper, no clear criteria,

little RS, little geodesy, almost 5 years old

12

Future

13

Thank you

Frans I. Rip, Lab. of Geo-Information Science and Remote Sensing Wageningen University and Research centre, the Netherlands frans.rip @ wur.nl – http://www.grs.wur.nl/UK/

14

Reference:Rip, F. I. and R. J. A. van Lammeren (2010). Mapping Geo-Information Education In Europe. ISPRS 2010, Mid-Term Symposium Commission VI - Cross-Border Education for Global Geo-Information, Enschede, the Netherlands, International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.