Page 2 of 2
Previous SIMILAR PROBLEMS IMPACT THE USER COMMUNITY The geospatial user community is no stranger to these problems. Geographic information system software, GPS receivers, etc., are not artifacts for producing "truth," but rather complex tools that can easily be misapplied or misinterpreted. It is regrettable, and even potentially dangerous, that in some cases they are casually viewed in an overly simplistic fashion. The recent advent of free and easily available lowlevel mapping and analysis tools has led to a massively expanded geospatial user community and the resulting increase in spatial awareness on their part is very welcome. At the same time, easy access to low-level tools and data has also generated nearly endless examples of the "if I can do it, then it is OK" mentality among them. Much of their activity is relatively harmless since it is done mainly for show or for personal use, but increasingly we see both public and private decisions being made that are based upon the inappropriate utilization of these new resources. This new user version of the pervasive geospatial workforce problems noted here can be a potential source of substantial harm to the individuals and organizations involved. WORKFORCE AND USER PROBLEMS ROOTED IN INADEQUATE EDUCATION The source of these widespread problems, seen in both the geospatial workforce and the geospatial user community, arises from a lack of comprehension on their part of the nature of the geographic problems being addressed as well as the capabilities and weaknesses of the geospatial tools that are being used. This lack of comprehension can, in both cases, be traced to inadequate geospatial education and training. Unlike manufacturing industries where traditionally apprentice training has been a significant source of workers, higher and continuing education has been and still remains the primary source of qualified geospatial workers. Current attempts by some ill-advised organizations in the United States to force the geospatial industry into a traditional manufacturing apprentice - journeyman mold are aggravating these problems rather than contributing to their solution. In part, both the geospatial industry and the higher education/ continuing education community are confusing the critical distinction between education and training. While both are essential, training is most often narrowly focused and generally is of immediate utility. Education, on the other hand, provides not only significant short term benefits but also an ability to understand where the individual fits into the broader geospatial picture. Most importantly, good education also provides the individual with a sound basis for understanding and personally adapting to the continuing, substantial changes. Many existing college and university programs, unfortunately, concentrate upon imparting basic skills in the manipulation of existing GIS software to the near exclusion of such topics as spatial problem identification and solving, the nature of spatial data, understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of available geospatial tools, and developing critical knowledge relating to critical geospatial topics in computer science, mathematics and statistics, and information technology. These programs are clearly confusing geospatial training with geospatial education. The balance should, in their case, be heavily tipped in the opposite direction. THE GEOSPATIAL EDUCATIONAL PYRAMID The general workforce and user community problems pointed out here may be more easily understood by looking at the useful pyramid model of GIS education (see figure 1) that I introduced a decade ago (Marble, 1998). Today, I would most likely substitute "geospatial" for "GIS" in the diagram since our world view has broadened considerably over the last decade. The level of necessary geospatial and allied knowledge ("depth") increases, and changes in its composition, as the individual's desired career goal moves toward the top of the pyramid. However, at every level of the pyramid a competent geospatial professional must always be able to respond effectively to the classic verification and validation questions: "Are you doing the right thing?" and, if so, "Are you doing it correctly?". Good education provides a sound basis for responses to both questions, while training, even if properly done, often does not look beyond the second one. For the geospatial education process to succeed, careers corresponding to all levels of the pyramid must rest upon a sound base that is common to every geospatial career path. This base must equip each member of the geospatial workforce not only with a broad scientific and technical basis for understanding what he or she is doing, but also with a working view of how their selected career interacts with and depends upon the other elements of the geospatial industry. Many career paths will show significant similarities at this level however each cluster of similar career paths will need to identify additional basic items that are relevant to their focus. For example, individuals with goals involving crime analysis and visualization will require not only the common geospatial basics but also a basic knowledge of criminology and other relevant areas. In all cases, the role of computer science knowledge (as opposed to understanding how to use a computer) is a critical component for understanding, adaptation to change, and future advancement.  CALL FOR CHANGE To significantly enhance the performance of the geospatial industry and to insure that its workforce is both efficient and capable of adaptation to continuing rapid technological change it is clear that existing educational approaches must undergo substantial revision. The current narrow disciplinary focus must be relaxed and a commonly accepted content for the common basis for our pyramid must be devised and adopted. Currently the pyramid has too much sand in its foundations and this must be corrected. Some little progress has been made in this area (DiBiase, DeMers, Johnson, et al, 2006) but a very substantial amount of work remains to be done. This can be accomplished only through the significant and continuing involvement of both academia and all elements of the geospatial industry. The need is critical and must be addressed in the very immediate future. REFERENCES
Page 2 of 2
Previous |
|||