SpringerLink
Log in

In Consideration of Context: The Potential of Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
TechTrends Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the past decade, geospatial technologies have emerged as a tool for develo** spatial reasoning and cognitive processes. While the foundational Learning to Think Spatially report from the National Research Center (2006) launched research into the use of geospatial technologies in isolation, more recently, cloud-based simulation software have begun to partner with geographic information system (GIS) databases to aid instructional designers in creating simulations in fields such as geology and geography. Both of these use cases - traditional geography instruction and immersive simulations - undervalue the potential of GIS to address larger issues within the Instructional Design and Technology (IDT) field. This conceptual paper seeks to present the potential of GIS systems as a designerly tool which can be used to reduce the cognitive load of communicating with very complex data sets and effectively show how information dynamically changes over time. Provisioning contextual analysis as a central skill of the designer may lead to more inclusive designs than a focus on adding steps to process-based models or focusing only on tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahlqvist, O., & Schlieder, C. (2018). Introducing geogames and geoplay: Characterizing an emerging research field. In O. Ahlqvist & C. Schlieder (Eds.), Geogames and Geoplay. Game-based Approaches to the Analysis of Geo-Information (pp. 1–18). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baaki, J., & Luo, T. (2017). Stimulating students’ use of external representations for a distance education time machine design. Tech Trends, 61(4), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0155-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baaki, J., & Luo, T. (2019). Instructional designers guided by external representations in a design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(3), 513–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-09493-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baaki, J., & Tracey, M. (2019). Weaving a localized context in use. What it means for instructional design. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 8(1), 2–13. https://doi.org/10.28990/jaid2011.00100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baaki, J., Tracey, M. W., & Hutchinson, A. (2017). Give us something to react to and make it rich: Designers refecting-in-action with external representations. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(4), 667–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9371-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babinski, G. (2021). GIS&T for equity and social justice. In John P. Wilson (ed.) The Geographic Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge (2nd Quarter 2021 Edition). https://doi.org/10.22224/gistbok/2021.2.2

  • Baker, R., & Dwyer, F. (2000). A meta-analytic assessment of the effect of visualized instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(4), 417–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, T. R., Kerski, J. J., Huynh, N. T., Viehrig, K., & Bednarz, S. W. (2012). Call for an agenda and Center for GIS Education Research. Review of International Geographic Education Online, 2(3), 254–288 Retrieved from https://rigeo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/05/RIGEO-V2-N3-1.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Banathy, B. H. (1991). Systems design of education: A journey to create the future. Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banathy, B. H. (1997). Designing social systems in a changing world: Contemporary systems thinking. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barstow, D., Gerrard, M. D., Kapisovsky, P. M., Tinker, R. F., & Wojtkiewicz, V. (1994). First national conference on the educational applications of GIS (EdGIS): Conference report. TERC Communications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaser, A. D., Sester, M., & Egenhofer, M. J. (2000). Visualization in an early stage of the problem-solving process in GIS. Computers & Geosciences, 26(1), 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boling, E. & Gray, C.M. (2015). Designerly Tools, Sketching, and Instructional Designers and the Guarantors of Design. In B. Hokanson, G. Clinton, & M. Tracey (eds) The Design of Learning Experience. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16504-2_8

  • Boling, E., Lachheb, A., Abramenka-Lachheb, V., Basdogan, M., Sankaranarayanan, R., & Chartrand, G. (2023). Factoring power and positionality into research on instructional design interventions. In B. Hokanson, M. Exter, M. Schmidt, & A. Tawfik (Eds.), Toward Inclusive Learning Design: Social Justice, Equity, and Community. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. C. (2017). Critical Pedagogy and Educational Technology. In A. D. Benson, R. Joseph, & J. L. Moore (Eds.), Culture, learning, and technology (pp. 8-27). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, A. C. (2018). Reconsidering the instructional design and technology timeline through a lens of social justice. Tech Trends, 62(4), 36–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0269-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1973). Going beyond the information given. In J. M. Anglin (Ed.), Beyond the information given: Studies in the psychology of knowing (pp. 218–238). Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., Schwier, R. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2009). The critical, relational practice of instructional design in higher education: An emerging model of change agency. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 645–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, A. A. (1996). Distinguishing systemic from systematic. TechTrends, 41(1), 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr-Chellman, D. J., & Carr-Chellman, A. (2020). Integrating systems: The history of systems from von Bertalanffy to profound learning. TechTrends, 64, 704–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00540-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T. K., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (2004). How do instructional-design practitioners make instructional-strategy decisions? Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(3), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.2004.tb00313.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, K. C. (2013). What is the world’s oldest map? The Cartographic Journal, 50(2), 136–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, L. (2018). The impact of paper versus digital map technology on students' spatial thinking skill acquisition. Journal of Geography, 117(4), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2017.1374990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought (2nd ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 8. Retrieved from https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8/

  • Cross, N. (2023). Design thinking: What just happened? Design Studies, 86, article no. 101187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101187

  • Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking. Berg.

  • Cross, N., Dorst, K., & Roozenburg, N. F. M. (Eds.). (1992). Research in design thinking. Delft University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curran, E., & Bowlick, F. (2022). Geographic Information Science education at Esri Development Center institutions. Transactions in GIS, 26(1), 341–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W. (1995). Instructional design and creativity: A response to critics. Educational Technology, 35(4), 5–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2006). Understanding Design. Gingko Press Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Favier, T. T., & Van der Schee, J. (2014). The effects of geography lessons with geospatial technologies on the development of high school students' relational thinking. Computers & Education, 76, 225–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Few, S. (2012). Show me the numbers: Designing tables and graphs to enlighten. Analytics Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M., & Levie, W. H. (1993). Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences (2nd ed.). Educational Technology Publications, Inc.

  • Gagné, R. M. (Ed.). (1965). Psychological principles in system development. Holt Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S., Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2014). Instructional Design Models. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. (2014). The new contexts of instructional design: Instruction, learning, technology, and design. In An Architectural Approach to Instructional Design, 125-158. Routledge.

  • Goodchild, M. E. (1988). Step** over the line: Technological constraints and the new cartography. American Cartographer, 15, 311–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. (2004). GIScience, Geography, Form, and Process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94(4), 709–714. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3694087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C., & Boling, E. (2016). Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: A problematic. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 969–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. M., Dagli, C., Demiral-Uzan, M., Ergulec, F., Tan, V., Altuwaijri, A. A., Gyabak, K., Hilligoss, M., Kizilboga, R., Tomita, K., & Boling, E. (2015). Judgment and instructional design: How ID practitioners work in practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 28(3), 25–49. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.odu.edu/10.1002/piq.21198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruender, C. D. (1996). Constructivism and learning: A philosophical appraisal. Educational Technology, 36(3), 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, A., & Leonardo, Z. (2018). Intersectionality, race-gender subordination, and education. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18759071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2017). Listen, Anarchist!’ A personal response to Simon Springer’s ‘Why a Radical Geography Must Be Anarchist. Dialogues in Human Geography, 7, 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, K., Baaki, J., & Tracey, M. (2023). “Faced with given circumstances”: A localized context of use approach. In B. Hokanson, M. Exter, M. Schmidt, & A. Tawfik (Eds.), Toward Inclusive Learning Design: Social Justice, Equity, and Community. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, A., & Tracey, M. W. (2015). Design ideas, reflection, and professional identity: How graduate students explore the idea generation process. Instructional Science, 43(5), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9354-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jo, I., & Bednarz, S. W. (2009). Evaluating geography textbook questions from a spatial perspective: using concepts of space, tools of representation, and cognitive processes to evaluate spatiality. Journal of Geography, 108, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: Past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolvoord, B., Keranen, K., & Rittenhouse, S. (2019). The geospatial semester: concurrent enrollment in geospatial technologies. Journal of Geography, 118(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1483961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, L. N., & Haase, L. M. (2019). The shortcomings of design thinking when compared to designerly thinking. The Design Journal, 22(6), 813–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., & Bednarz, R. (2009). Effect of GIS learning on spatial thinking. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 33, 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260802276714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, K. (2021). Putting indigenous place-names and languages back on the map. ESRI. Retrieved from https://www.esri.com/about/newsroom/arcnews/putting-indigenous-place-names-and-languages-back-on-maps/

  • Lowell, V. L., & Moore, R. L. (2020). Develo** practical knowledge and skills of online instructional design students through authentic learning and real-world activities. TechTrends, 64, 581–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00518-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, A. J., & Wikle, T. A. (2019). GIS&T pedagogies and instructional challenges in higher education: A survey of educators. Transactions in GIS, 23(5), 892–907. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R., Howarth, J., Kaplan, M., & Hanna, S. (2018). Applying the segmenting principle to online geography slideshow lessons. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 563–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLoad, G., Allen, T. R., Steinhilber, E., Hutt, S., Solano, M., & Burdick, K. (2020). Future Sea Level and Recurrent Flooding Risk for Coastal Virginia. Commonwealth Center for Recurrent Flooding Resiliency. Retrieved from Future Sea Level and Recurrent Flooding Risk for Coastal Virginia – CCRFR (floodingresiliency.org)

  • Melero, J., Hernández-Leo, D., Sun, J., Santos, P., & Blat, J. (2015). How was the activity? A visualization support for a case of location-based learning design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 317–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millea, J., Green, I., & Putland, G. (2005). Emerging Technologies: A Framework for Thinking. Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Training. Retrieved from http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/54114

  • Monmonier, M. (2004). Rhumb Lines and Map Wars: A Social History of the Mercator Projection. University of Chicago Press; Chicago. https://doi.org/10.7208/9780226534329

  • Moore, S. (2021). The design models we have are not the design models we need. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 10(4). https://doi.org/10.51869/104/smo

  • National Research Council. (2006). Learning to think spatially. National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2013). Future U.S. workforce for geospatial intelligence. National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, H. G. (2020). The promise of systemic designing: Giving form to water. In M. J. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy, 1-49. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1987). A critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future. Retrieved from http://www.papert.org/articles/ACritiqueofTechnocentrism.html.

  • Parker, H. D. (1988). The unique qualities of a geographic information system: A commentary. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 54(11), 1547–1549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavlovskaya, M. (2018). Critical GIS as a tool for social transformation. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, 62, 40–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, X. (2006). Geographic information technologies: an influence on the spatial ability of university students. Geography. San Marcos, Texas, Texas State University-San Marcos: 127.

  • Reeves, T. C., & Lin, L. (2020). The research we have is not the research we need. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1991–2001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09811-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricker, B.A., Rickles, P.R., Fagg, G.A., and Haklay, M.E. (2020). Tool, toolmaker, and scientist: case study experiences using GIS in interdisciplinary research. Cartography and Geographic Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2020.1748113

  • Rickles, P., & Ellul, C. (2017). Innovations in and the changing landscape of geography education with geographic information systems. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 41(3), 305–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2017.1331210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, L. (1995). A historical review of visualization in human cognition. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1992.tb00546.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (1994). Design and evaluating: Creating futures and appreciation error. Educational Technology, 34(1), 10–22 https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428127

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaal, S., Otto, S., Schaal, S., & Lude, A. (2018). Game-Related enjoyment or personal pre-requisites – Which is the crucial factor when using geogames to encourage adolescents to value local biodiversity. International Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2018.1441571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1992). The theory of inquiry: Dewey’s legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22(2), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/1180029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, E. (2005). Knowledge production through critical GIS: Genealogy and prospects. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 40(4), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.3138/GH27-1847-QP71-7TP7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sockman, B. R., Baker, F. W., III, Blevins, S. J., Bond, M. A., & Doucet Rand, A. (2020). Introduction to the September 2020 special issue: Harnessing systems thinking to inform meaningful change efforts in organizations. Tech Trends, 64(5), 682–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, I. (2005). No humble pie: The origins and usage of a statistical chart. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30(4), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986030004353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, S. (2014). Why a radical geography must be anarchist. Dialogues in Human Geography, 4(3), 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K. (2008). Designing matters, designing minds: The importance of nurturing the designerly in young people. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 13(3), 8–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J. (2020). The utility of design thinking to promote systemic instructional design practices in the workplace. TechTrends, 64(2), 202–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J. E., & Tracey, M. W. (2014). An examination of the decision-making process used by designers in multiple disciplines. TechTrends, 58(5), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0789-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J., Baaki, J., & Hoard, B. (2018). The influence of perceived constraints during needs assessment on design conjecture. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30, 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9173-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J., & Xu, M. (2020). An examination of the systemic reach of instructional design models: a systematic review. Tech Trends, 64, 710–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00539-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J., Baaki, J., & Stapleton, L. (2022). An exploration of conjecture strategies used by instructional design students to support design decision-making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70, 585–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10092-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefaniak, J., Tawfik, A., & Sentz, J. (2023). Supporting dynamic instructional design decisions within a bounded rationality. TechTrends, 67, 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00792-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svihla, V. (2021). Design thinking. In J. K. McDonald & R. E. West (Eds.), Design for Learning: Principles, Processes, and Praxis. EdTech Books https://edtechbooks.org/id/design_thinking

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M., & Wedman, J. (1990). A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(2), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M., & Richey, R. (1997). The role of context in learning and ID. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(2), 85–115 https://www.jstor.org/stable/30221388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M., Mitchell, M., & Joseph, R. (2002). The third dimension of ADDIE. TechTrends, 46(2), 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, J., Ren, C., Lei, Y., & Wang, Y. (2020). Designing MATLAB course for undergraduates in cartography and geographic information science: Linking research and teaching. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 44(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, J., Koh, J., Ren, C., & Wang, Y. (2022). Understanding higher education students' develo** perceptions of geocapabilities through the creation of story maps with geographical information systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 687–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vélez, V., & Solorzano, D. (2017). Critical race spatial analysis: Conceptualizing GIS as a tool for critical race research in education. In D. Morrison, S. A. Annamma, & D. Jackson (Eds.), Critical Race Spatial Analysis: Map** to Understand and Address Educational Inequity (pp. 8–31). Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1972). The history and status of general systems theory. The Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 407–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wedman, J., & Tessmer, M. (1991). Adapting instructional design to project circumstance: The layers of necessity model. Educational Technology, 38(7), 48–52: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44427688

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch, M., Barlex, D., & Lim, H. S. (2000). Sketching: Friend or foe to the novice designer? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 102(2), 125–148. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008991319644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner, P., Jażdżewska, I., & Zwoliński, Z. (2015). Current state and future perspectives of university education of GIS and Geoinformation in Poland. In I. Jażdżewska (Ed.), GIS in Higher Education in Poland: Curriculum, Issues, Discussion. University of Lodz Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, D., Luzeckyj, A., Toohey, D., VAnderlie, J., & Searle, B. (2020). Do academics and university administrators really know better? The ethics of positioning student perspectives in learning analytics. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitbeck, C. (1996). Ethics as design: Doing justice to moral problems. Hastings Center Report, 26(3), 9–16 https://edtechbooks.org/-kwsZ

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikle, T., & Fagin, T. (2014). GIS Course Planning: A Comparison of Syllabi at US College and Universities. Transactions in GIS, 18(4), 574–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodley, X., Hernandez, C., Parra, J., & Negash, B. (2017). Celebrating difference: Best practices in culturally responsive teaching online. TechTrends, 61(5), 470–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ** environment : Learning differences in spatial thinking skills. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(4), 1865–1881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. A. (2008). The culture based model: Constructing a model of culture. Journal of Educational, Technology & Society, 11(2), 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Old Dominion University, 5115 Hampton Blvd, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Kristin Herman

  2. Old Dominion University, 4300 Engineering and Computational Sciences Building, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Miguel Ramlatchan

  3. West Chester University, West Chester, PA, 19383, USA

    Ross Herman

Authors
  1. Kristin Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miguel Ramlatchan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ross Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin Herman.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This research does not involve human participants or animals.

Conflicts of interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herman, K., Ramlatchan, M. & Herman, R. In Consideration of Context: The Potential of Geographic Information Systems (GIS). TechTrends 68, 161–173 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00916-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00916-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation