Advertisement

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 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.

Keywords

Geomedia Citizenship education Teacher training 

Notes

Acknowledgement

Work on this publication has been co-funded by the European commission under the: LLP-Comenius multilateral project SPACIT (517908-LLP-2011-1-AT-COMENIUS-CMP).

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Completeth ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, W. L., Wells, C., & Rank, A. (2009). Young citizens and civic learning: Two paradigms of citizenship in the digital age. Citizenship Studies, 13(2), 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlos, V., & Gryl, I. (2013). Where do critical thinking and spatial citizenship meet? Proposing a framework of intersections. In T. Jekel (Ed.), GI_Forum 2013 (pp. 437–446). Berlin: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  4. Cedefop (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training). (2010). Learning outcomes approaches in VET curricula: A comparative analysis of nine European countries (Research Paper No 6). Luxembourg: Publications of the European Union. Available at www.cedefop.europa.eu/EN/Files/5506_en.pdf. Accessed 28 June 2014.
  5. De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  6. Elwood, S. (2006). Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS, 10(5), 693–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elwood, S., & Mitchell, K. (2013). Another politics is possible: Neogeographies, visual spatial tactics, and political formation. Cartographica, 48(4), 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fargher, M. (2006). Linking lessons learnt from the classroom with research findings on pedagogies with GIS. Available at http://www.geography.org.uk/download/GA_PRSSFargher.doc. Accessed: 28 June 2014.
  9. Gonzalez, J., & Wagenaar, R. (eds.) (2008). Universities’ contribution to the Bologna Process. An introduction. Available at http://www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/images/stories/Publications/ENGLISH_BROCHURE_FOR_WEBSITE.pdf. Accessed: 28 June 2014.
  10. Gryl, I. (2009). Kartenlesekompetenz. Ein Beitrag zum konstruktivistischen Geographieunterricht. Wien: Materialien zur Didaktik der Geographie und Wirtschaftskunde, Bd. 22.Google Scholar
  11. Gryl, I., & Jekel, T. (2012). Re-centering GI in secondary education. Towards a spatial citizenship approach. Cartographica, 47(1), 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gryl, I., Jekel, T., & Donert, K. (2010). GI & spatial citizenship. In T. Jekel, A. Koller, K. Donert, & R. Vogler (Eds.), Learning with GI V (pp. 2–11). Berlin/Offenbach: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  13. Gryl, I., Schulze, U., & Kanwischer, D. (2013). Spatial citizenship. The concept of competence. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_forum 2013 (pp. 282–293). Berlin: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  14. Harley, J. B. (1989). Deconstructing the map. Cartographica, 26(2), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris, L., & Harrower, M. (2005). Critical interventions and lingering concerns: Critical cartography/GISci, social theory, and alternative possible futures. ACME, 4(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
  16. Jekel, T. (2007). What you all want is GIS2.0. Collaborative GI based learning environments: Spatial planning and education. In A. Car (Ed.), GI-crossroads @ GI-forum (pp. 84–89). Heidelberg: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  17. Jekel, T. (2008). Die Macht der Karten und die Macht der Kinder. Versuch einer Begründung des Lernens mit Geoinformation. In K. Dobler, T. Jekel, & H. Pichler (Eds.), Kind: macht: raum (pp. 62–75). Heidelberg: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  18. Jekel, T., & Gryl, I. (2010). Geographie, geoinformation und politische bildung. In I. Juchler (Ed.), Kompetenzen in der politischen bildung (pp. 91–102). Schwalbach: Wochenschau Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Jekel, T., Gryl, I., Sanchez, E., Jouneau-Sion, C., & Lyon, J. (Eds.). (2014). Learning and teaching with geomedia. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
  20. Kanwischer, D., & Gryl, I. (2012). Der Einsatz von digitalen Karten und Globen zur Förderung der Argumentationskompetenz. In A. Budke (Ed.), Diercke Kommunikation und Argumentation (pp. 77–85). Braunschweig: Diercke.Google Scholar
  21. Kanwischer, D., & Quennet, F. (2012). Distance education and spatial citizenship in Africa– Challenges and prospects. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 2(1), 95–117.Google Scholar
  22. Kanwischer, D., Schulze, U., & Gryl, I. (2012). Spatial citizenship. Towards a curriculum. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2012 (pp. 172–181). Berlin: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  23. Kennedy, D., Hyland, A., & Norma, R. (2006). Writing and using learning outcomes: a practical guide. In E. Froment (Eds.), EUA Bologna handbook. Berlin: Raabe. Making Bologna work. Chapter C 3.4-1, Implementing Bologna in your institution. Available at: http://www.ehea-journal.eu/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=148#b. Accessed 28 June 2014.
  24. Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2007). Rethinking maps. Progress in Human Geography, 31(3), 331–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Massey, D. (1998). Power geometries and the politics of space-time. Heidelberg: Department of Geography at University of Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  27. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical contents knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. National Research Council. (2006). Learning to think spatially. GIS as a support system in the K-12 curriculum. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  29. Painho, M., & Curvelo, P. (2012). Building dynamic, ontology-based alternative path for GIS&T curricula. In D. J. Unwin, K. E. Foote, N. J. Tate, & D. DiBiase (Eds.), Teaching geographic information science and technology in higher education (pp. 98–115). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Ann Arbor/New York: University of Michigan/Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Pickles, J. (Ed.). (1995). Ground truth: The social implications of geographic information systems. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  32. Schulze, U., Gryl, I., & Kanwischer, D. (2014). Spatial citizenship – Creating a curriculum for teacher education. In R. Vogler, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2014 (pp. 230–241). Berlin: Offenbach.Google Scholar
  33. Schuurman, N. (2000). Trouble in the heartland: GIS and its critics in the 1990s. Progress in Human Geography, 24(4), 569–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schuurman, N. (2009). Critical GIS. In R. Kitchin & Thrift, N. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of human geography (Vol. 2, pp. 363–368). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  35. Skiliftgesellschaft Hochfügen GmbH. (2014). Interaktiver Pistenplan. Available at: http://hochfuegenski.com/content/pistenplan/interaktiver-pistenplan.html. Accessed 7 Nov 2014.
  36. SPACIT (Spatial Citizenship). (2014). Project website of the EU Comenius Project Spatial Citizenship. Available at: http://www.spatialcitizenship.org/. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.
  37. Strobl, J. (2008). Digital earth brainware. In J. Schiewe und U. Michel (Eds.), Geoinformatics paves the highway to digital earth (pp. 134–138). Osnabrück: gi-reports@igf.Google Scholar
  38. Unwin, D. J., Foote, K. E., Tate, N. J., & DiBiase, D. (Eds.). (2012). Teaching geographic information science and technology in higher education. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  39. Vogler, R., Hennig, S., Jekel, T., & Donert, K. (2012). Towards a concept of “spatially enabled learning”. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2012 (pp. 204–211). Berlin: Wichmann.Google Scholar
  40. Winkler, B., Partl, A., Weilharter, K., & Maier, K. (2013). Einsatz der Applikation “Ski amadé Guide”. Unterricht. GW-Unterricht, 130, 56–60.Google Scholar
  41. Wood, D. (1993). The power of maps. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geography and GeologyUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria
  2. 2.Department of GeographyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Human GeographyGoethe University FrankfurtFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations