tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7274865380854501690.post3494614297188480695..comments2021-06-16T19:51:31.007-07:00Comments on Geographic Information Science: The crooked and forked road of geographic information science educationUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7274865380854501690.post-73565383519963631902012-10-03T04:23:45.130-07:002012-10-03T04:23:45.130-07:00I agree. Simply learning a GIS program does not gi...I agree. Simply learning a GIS program does not give a student the ability to use it. Spatial reasoning and methodology should come first. If you understand the methodology then you can tackle any GIS program. It seems as the jobs in GIS are stressing only GIS programming. Without a knowledge of the purpose of GIS and in turn GIScience, what is the purpose of programming. This is creating a modern version of slave labor, not professionals. Michael A. McAdamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02214803931169008367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7274865380854501690.post-19994718260102352872012-10-02T08:56:53.095-07:002012-10-02T08:56:53.095-07:00GIS is a technology, but that doesn't mean the...GIS is a technology, but that doesn't mean there isn't GIS science as well. In hydrology, for example, there is a rich body of literature to develop new methods and algorithms to delineate streams using elevation data. These algorithms are (usually) tested using the scientific method and end up in the software if they pass muster. On the user end, work focuses on how to bes apply these tools as a science.<br /><br />However, I do feel the GIScience taught in schools, at least in the natural resources, is really how to use one particular piece of software, with the nuts, bolts, reasoning and assumptions behind the tools taking a backseat. It would be helpful to focus on the methods rather than the software, perhaps by making students try out other software packages and reporting back to the class. Just one idea of many; this is certainly not a simple problem to unravel.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7274865380854501690.post-10306088195308480852012-09-25T07:25:42.786-07:002012-09-25T07:25:42.786-07:00The use of science in a discipline's title doe...The use of science in a discipline's title does give the aura of legitimacy. Would you rename GIScience to GIStudies? I will discuss this issue as a blog entry later.Michael A. McAdamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02214803931169008367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7274865380854501690.post-77120744222508789392012-09-21T20:17:43.319-07:002012-09-21T20:17:43.319-07:00GIS is a tchnology, not a science. The term "...GIS is a tchnology, not a science. The term "GI science" was invented by academics who were not getting the respect they wanted from other academic geographers. They needed to be able to defend themselves from attack by human geographers who saw technology as evil or by physical geographers who were actually doing real science, so they invented "GI science". It is no more a science than are "political science" (which is really just politics), "mathematical science" (which is really just mathematics), or "domestic science" (housework).<br /><br />Now, if you're concerned about GIS programming versus GIS analysis (different scope), or GIS technician versus GIS engineer/professinal (different level), then that's a useful debate.giserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04750747372994416707noreply@blogger.com