possibilities with edumapping l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Possibilities with EduMapping PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Possibilities with EduMapping

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

Possibilities with EduMapping - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 83 Views
  • Uploaded on

Possibilities with EduMapping. 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. Problem 1: description diversity.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Possibilities with EduMapping' - cyma


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
possibilities with edumapping

Possibilities withEduMapping

Frans I. Rip, Sept. 2010

overview of this presentation
Overview of this presentation
  • Problem statement / why EduMapping?
  • EduMapping = Referencing Course Content
  • GI BoK? (22%)
  • Possibilities & deployment (review, compare)
  • Obstacles
  • Future
  • Summary

2

slide3

Problem 1: description diversity

GI education and training comes in many shapes and sizes.

The ways to describe their contents are diverse too.

  • 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

3

problem 2 subjectivity by role
Problem 2: subjectivity by role

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

4

slide5
projection metaphor: imagine movie projection:

- out of focus - without screen

http://www.beachhutmedia.com.au/news_2006.html

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

5

slide6

EduMapping

EduMapping relates course content to an external reference

and creates a LABEL

ASSESSMENT

6

gi bok as a reference
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

slide8

A label for GI-content

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

8

possibilities deployment
Possibilities & deployment
  • 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)

9

review options
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
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
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

thank you
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/

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.

14