GIS@school – new didactical aspects of using GIS in geography education

Siegmund, A., Viehrig, K. and Volz, D.

Department of Geography, University of Education Heidelberg, Germany

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Geographical information systems are an integral though sometimes invisible part of daily life and are used in
various fields such as research, planning and administration. Consequently, lesson materials and special GIS-
programs have been developed for use in German schools. Moreover, using GIS in school has been made
compulsory in a number of state curricula. Nevertheless, the GIS use as yet is only inadequately implemented in
the school context, especially in non-grammar school and lower secondary education. Reasons for this are
complex, but eventually lead to the question which added value the use of GIS can contribute to fostering spatial
behaviour competence, which is the central goal of geography education in Germany. Until now however,
studies have not dealt with that question, but rather focused on the contribution for GIS use for instance to
computer literacy or how students are able to deal with GIS-techniques. Consequently, based on an overview of
the current situation of GIS use in schools in Germany, new concepts for fostering spatial behaviour competence
through the use of GIS and evaluating associated learning effects will be presented.

Key words
spatial behaviour competence, German geography education, GIS, curriculum, spatial education
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Geographic information systems (GIS) are used in a wide array of fields, such as researching
malaria occurrence, planning cell phone networks or managing real estate. Consequently,
being able to work with them has become an important skill in a variety of professions. As
their penetration of the job market and daily life rises, their integration into high school
geography education is increasingly demanded across Europe. In Germany, this process
started more than ten years ago. However, the integration as well as the corresponding
didactics have been described as still being at the outset, with only slow progress (De Lange,
2006; Falk and Hoppe, 2004; Falk and Schleicher, 2005; Schäfer, 2007b). This paper will
give an overview about recent developments of GIS use in German schools. Then it will focus
on an aspect which hitherto has been for the most part neglected, namely, the question of in
how far the GIS use in school can contribute to reaching the guiding objective of German
geography education.

The current situation of GIS at schools in Germany is characterized by a considerable variety

with regard to at least six aspects, which in practice are all closely interrelated.

First of all, unlike to the clearly defined meaning of GIS within geoinformation science, the
use of the term GIS in the educational discussion seems fuzzy (De Lange, 2007). The term
seems to encompass both digital geoinformation and geographic information systems in the
narrower sense. Thus users are confronted with applications so diverse as digital city maps
(Reitz, 2005), navigation systems (Zürl, 2005), map-based online information systems which
are provided for instance by government organizations (Schäfer, 2005a), Web- and Desktop-
GIS specifically developed for the use in schools (e.g. Falk and Nöthen, 2005; Heiken and
Peyke, 2005; Püschel, 2005) and professional software such as ArcView (Falk and Nöthen,
2005). These types entail a wide range of differing possibilities of what can be done with the
data (viewing only, manipulate, query,...) and whether only given or also own data can be
used. In the academic discussion, consequently, there appears to be a trend towards speaking
of “GI in schools”. However, in accordance with the common use of the term GIS in curricula
as well as for example internet services for teachers such as www.lehrer-online.de, the term
GIS will be used in its ‘fuzzy’ sense in this paper.

The fuzziness of the term points to a great diversity of practices regarding which kind of GIS
should – or can be – used in the school context. Several examples exist that a start directly
with desktop-GIS is possible (e.g. Klein, 2005; Krause, 2004; Unterthurner, 2004), but there
is also an increasing number of proponents for starting with WebGIS first (Joachim, 2006;
Püschel, 2007). The layer structure of a GIS can even be learned without computer and
software, however, using for instance transparencies (Siegmund, 2001). Seemingly, despite
even a state wide licence in Baden-Württemberg (Engelhardt, 2004) and lesson examples (e.g.
Schwab and Kussmaul, 2005; Vogler, 2007) ArcView use in schools is currently not as much
a topic as in other countries (e.g. for New Zealand see www.gismaped.co.nz, for USA see
Kerski, 2000). While comprehensive statistics are missing, it appears that Desktop-GIS
programs developed specifically for schools (www.dierckegis.de, www.schulgis.de, Heyden,
2006; Krause, 2005; Schäfer, 2005b), free software like SpatialCommander (www.gdv-
mapbuilder.de, Püschel, 2007) and a variety of WebGIS (e.g. www.sn.schule.de/~gis/,
www.webgis-schule.de/127_ENG_HTML.php, Joachim, 2006; Püschel, 2005) are currently
the most commonly mentioned for schools.

The discussion of which GIS should be used is closely connected to the question of which
basic approach should be taken, that is, whether GIS should be content or tool. In this context,
four terms are important: teaching about GIS, teaching with GIS, learning with GIS and
researching with GIS. Teaching about GIS means that the teacher gives explanations as to
what a GIS is, how it works and where it is used. Teaching with GIS refers to a still largely
teacher centred lesson, but GIS, for instance with the help of a projector, is used as a tool to
discuss a geographic topic. In contrast, learning with GIS means that the GIS is in the hands
of the pupils who with its help work on a geographic topic, using given data sets. Finally,
researching with GIS stands for the pupils creating own data sets and then working with them
(Falk and Schleicher, 2005; Schleicher, 2007; USGS, 2005).
Various progressions of these four stages are in discussion, closely linked to the question of
age group. One model proposes teaching about GIS from grade five, then teaching with GIS
from grade six/ seven, learning with GIS from grade eight/ nine and researching with GIS
from grade ten/ eleven (Falk and Schleicher, 2005; Schleicher, 2007). In contrast, others see
the place of teaching about GIS in university level, of teaching with GIS in school education
and of researching with GIS in higher education (USGS, 2005). Oftentimes, however, a clear
allocation of models or examples to the terms or to specific age groups seems difficult (e.g.
Püschel, 2007). Generally, it can be said that there is a range from those wanting to start with
the beginning of Sekundarstufe I 1 (grade five) (e.g. Püschel, 2007), to those stating that pupils
need a certain amount of pre-knowledge and hence GIS should be used only from the end of
Sekundarstufe I on (e.g. Feyk, 2006), to finally, those asking whether GIS has a place in
school education at all (Schallhorn, 2004).

This variety is also reflected in the recent curricula reforms. With regard to age group, GIS is
for example made compulsory already from grade seven/ eight on in the federal state Baden-
Württemberg, but not mentioned explicitly in the curriculum of the federal state of Bremen
(Ministerium für Kultus Jugend und Sport Baden-Württemberg, 2004; Senator für Bildung
und Wissenschaft, 2001; 2006). It appears that compulsory GIS use has been largely restricted
to Gymnasium 2 so far. However, the standards for the Intermediate School Certificate,
recently published by the German Association for Geography, include GIS explicitly (German
Association for Geography, 2007). It remains to be seen in how far this will lead to an
increased integration into non-Gymnasium federal curricula in the future. In any case, even
though GIS is not included in the curriculum as compulsory, teachers could use it if they
want, as curricula offer justifications such as that pupils should be able to gather information
from a variety of sources (Senator für Bildung und Wissenschaft, 2006). With regard to the
basic approach of GIS education, there is a broad range across different documents. The
recommendations for the Intermediate School Certificate, achieved at the end of grade ten,
state that pupils should be able to “describe the applications of GIS” (German Association for
Geography, 2007:17). In contrast, the Gymnasium-curriculum of Baden-Württemberg states
that at the end of grade ten pupils should be able to “employ geographic information systems

1
In Germany, when the focus is on the age group and not on the type of school, the following terms are used:
Primarstufe (usually grade one to four), Sekundarstufe I (usually grade five to ten) and Sekundarstufe II (grade
eleven to twelve or thirteen).
2
Gymnasium is a school type of secondary education. It encompasses grades five to twelve (or thirteen). It leads
to the Abitur, i.e. the certificate which allows pupils to enter a university.
(GIS-presentations) for analysis” (Ministerium für Kultus Jugend und Sport Baden-
Württemberg, 2004:242, transl. by authors).

Different opinions also exist with regard to the rationale for why GIS should be used in
school. Often cited arguments are the high prevalence in everyday life and the increasing
importance of GIS in the job market. Moreover, an “added value” is also seen in GIS being a
tool to train the pupils’ methodical competence, media competence and social competence.
Furthermore, from the viewpoint of the practice an increase in effectiveness with regard to
learning processes, getting up-to-date data and faster access to information once the basics of
GIS have been mastered are underlined as well as the motivation factor of using this kind of
new media. GIS is also seen as contributing to the pupils’ overall computer literacy. Other
arguments that have been put forward – in context of demands formulated in recent
educational discourse - include opportunity for autonomous learning, changing teacher role or
linking community and school (e.g. de Lange, 2006; Falk and Hoppe, 2004; Joachim, 2006;
Schäfer, 2007a; Siegmund, 2002).

However, besides this colourful variety of arguments, already in 2002 it had been stated that
“the guiding principle of GIS use in school is conceptual and systemic learning” as part of a
process leading to “sustainable thinking and understanding in the system human – society –
environment” (Schäfer, 2002, transl. by authors). It needs to be pointed out that these very
subject specific aspects have not been sufficiently deliberated in the added value discussion
yet.

With a look to the guiding objective of geography education as a whole, it is apparent that
conceptual thinking, thinking in systems and sustainability are essential parts of what has
been termed spatial behaviour competence (Raumverhaltenskompetenz) by Köck (e.g. Köck,
1989; 1993; 2005). Other guiding objective terms in discussion such as space-related action
competence (raumbezogene Handlungskompetenz) or education for sustainable development
(Bildung für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung) (Haubrich, 2006, Kultusministerkonferenz, 2005)
incorporate these aspects as well.

Facing the high relevance of relating GIS use in geography lessons to the guiding objective of
geography education, it is striking that only little empirical research has been done so far. One
contribution to this research question originates from Kerski (2000). He conducted
pre-/post-tests both with a standardized geography test and a fifteen minute ‘spatial analysis-
test’, combined with case studies in the same classes. His study was carried out in grades nine
to twelve in three American High Schools, using ArcView. Little evidence arises out of the
tests for significant differences between GIS and Non-GIS-groups, but some hints on positive
effects of GIS use could be observed during the lessons (Kerski, 2000). In the German
context, Klein (2005) used a questionnaire after a GIS training for thirteen Sekundarstufe II
pupils in the state of Schleswig-Holstein to examine the added value of GIS with focus on the
acceptance of GIS by the pupils and how they rate the value of individual GIS tools with
regard to various aspects of spatial education. A majority of her respondents stated that GIS
scores better than paper maps with regard to representation of spatial processes, easier search
for structures, functions or processes and better being able to orient oneself in space.
Moreover, one pupil commented that the layer principle simplifies spatial analysis (Klein,
2005). A project related evaluation in one class twelve in Berlin stated that in principle, GIS is
a suitable tool to foster systemic thinking, for instance through pointing out complex
interactions and global connections. However, it was conceded that the project could only
provide a small contribution to fostering systemic thinking as pupils frequently lacked
background knowledge to understand the individual systems (Falk and Nöthen, 2005).

Whereas the results of the aforesaid investigations can provide first hunches and valuable
impulses for the integration of GIS into the classroom and its related research, it is obvious
that they are by far neither sufficient to answer the question of the added value of GIS with
regard to the fostering of spatial behaviour competence nor to impact policy decisions.
Consequently, more fundamental research is needed to clarify the role GIS can – and maybe
even should – play in high school geography education.

In order to investigate an effectiveness of GIS use on spatial behaviour competence

development first of all adequate assessment instruments have to be developed and evaluated.
For, despite the long standing history of the term no widely recognized means of assessment
are available for spatial behaviour competence yet.

For the development of the assessment instruments first of all it has to be defined what
exactly spatial behaviour competence does encompass. Thereby the different sub-
qualifications of spatial behaviour competence as defined and described by Köck need to be
taken into account (see Fig. 1).
Fig. 1: spatial behaviour competence (based on Köck, 1993; 2005; Köck and Rempfler, 2004)

It is expected that the effect of GIS use differs for individual sub-qualifications. It can be
assumed, for instance, that GIS use has an influence on spatial orientation but not on thinking
in space-ethical categories. Therefore, it is necessary that the assessment instrument should
allow a differentiation between sub-qualifications.

Moreover the instrument has to be age-adequate and linked to curriculum content. Since GIS
use is the most controversially discussed and least covered with studies for the lower years of
secondary education, the emphasis should be placed on that age group.

To sum it up, under the slogan “GIS at school” a great variety of what is named GIS and
which learning objectives should be reached with the use of GIS in the classroom is
subsumed. Moreover, the fuzzy term GIS is associated with the fostering of a multitude of
competences. There are however only few empirical studies investigating this relationship.
Consequently, a project under way at the University of Education in Heidelberg aims at
developing assessment tools and using them to explore the relationship between GIS use and
competence development, focusing on spatial behaviour competence.

De Lange, N. 2006, Geoinformationssysteme im Geographieunterricht: Paradigmenwechsel?! Vortrag auf der 2.

GIS-Ausbildungstagung 2006 Potsdam, Konferenz-CD. Potsdam.
De Lange, N. 2007, GIS in der Geoinformatik - GIS in der Schule. IN Jekel, T., Koller, A. & Strobl, J. (Eds.)
Lernen mit Geoinformation II. Heidelberg, Wichmann 32-41.
Engelhardt, R. 2004, GIS an Schulen Baden-Württemberg, Konzeption – Erfahrungen – Projekte, Vortrag auf
der Intergeo 2004 Stuttgart, www.intergeo.de/deutsch/page/kongress/downloads/
archiv/2004/Engelhardt.pdf [Accessed: 2007-04-25].
Falk, G. & Hoppe, W. 2004, GIS – ein Gewinn für den Geographieunterricht? Überlegungen zum Einsatz
moderner Geoinformationssoftware im Unterricht. Praxis Geographie, 34 (2), 10-12.
Falk, G. & Schleicher, Y. 2005, Didaktik und Methodik des schulischen GIS-Einsatzes. Geographie heute, 26
(233), 2-7.
Falk, G. C. & Nöthen, E. 2005, GIS in der Schule Potenziale und Grenzen, Berlin, Mensch & Buch-Verlag.
Feyk, M. 2006, Kritische Gedanken zum Einsatz von Geografischen Informationssystemen (GIS) in
allgemeinbildenden Schulen. Medien + Erziehung, 50 (4), 63-69.
German Association for Geography 2007, Educational Standards in Geography for the Intermediate School
Certificate, Berlin.
Haubrich, H. (Ed.) 2006, Geographie unterrichten lernen, Die neue Didaktik der Geographie konkret, München,
Oldenbourg.
Heiken, A. & Peyke, G. 2005, GIS-Kompetenz erwerben, Das Beispiel SchulGIS. Geographie heute, 26 (233),
30-32.
Heyden, K. 2006, Risikokartierung mit GIS. Der Einsatz von Geographischen Informationssystemen in der
Kursstufe. Praxis Geographie, (12), 38-41.
Joachim, J. 2006, WebGIS in der Schule. Geographie aktuell, (5), 26-30.
Kerski, J. 2000, The Implementation and Effectiveness of GIS Technology and Methods in Secondary Education.
University of Colorado.
Klein, U. 2005, Räumliche Prozesse werden anschaulich, Schüler bewerten GIS im Unterricht. arcaktuell, (3),
27.
Köck, H. 1989, Aufgabe und Aufbau des Geographieunterrichts. Geographie und Schule, (57), 11-25.
Köck, H. 1993, Raumbezogene Schlüsselqualifikationen - der fachimmanente Beitrag des Geographieunterrichts
zum Lebensalltag des Einzelnen und Funktionieren der Gesellschaft. Geographie und Schule, 15 (8),
14-22.
Köck, H. 2005, Raumverhaltenskompetenz. IN Köck, H. & Stonjek, D. (Eds.) ABC der Geographiedidaktik.
Köln.
Köck, H. & Rempfler, A. 2004, Erkenntnisleitende Ansätze - Schlüssel zur Profilierung des
Geographieunterrichts mit erprobten Unterrichtsvorschlägen, Köln, Aulis.
Krause, T. 2004, Digitaler Kinderstadtteilplan, Ein GIS-Projekt aus dem Schulumfeld für die Orientierungsstufe.
Praxis Geographie, 34 (2), 13-15.
Krause, T. 2005, Arbeiten mit digitalen Karten - Kartenkompetenz durch die Nutzung von
Geoinformationssystemen. Praxis Geographie, (11), 30-33.
Kultusministerkonferenz 2005, Einheitliche Prüfungsanforderungen in der Abiturprüfung Geographie,
www.kmk.org/doc/beschl/196-12_EPA%20Geographie.pdf [Accessed: 2007-07-11].
Ministerium für Kultus Jugend und Sport Baden-Württemberg 2004, Bildungsstandards für Geographie im
Rahmen des Fächerverbundes Geographie - Wirtschaft - Gemeinschaftskunde Gymnasium,
www.bildung-staerkt-menschen.de/service/downloads/Bildungsstandards/Gym/Gym_Geo_bs.pdf
[Accessed: 2007-07-10].
Püschel, L. 2005, Internetbasierte GIS-Anwendungen für den Einstieg in die GIS-Arbeit, Klimazonen mit dem
Web-GIS Weltklima darstellen. Geographie heute, 26 (233), 18-21.
Püschel, L. 2007, Vom Web-GIS zum Desktop-GIS - ein didaktisch-methodisches Konzept zur Einführung von
Geographischen Informationssystemen an Schulen. IN Jekel, T., Koller, A. & Strobl, J. (Eds.) Lernen
mit Geoinformation II. Heidelberg, Wichmann 138-148.
Reitz, V. 2005, Nutzungskonflikte im Nationalpark Schleswig-Holsteinisches Wattenmeer, Inhaltliches Lernen
mit SchulGIS. Geographie heute, 26 (233), 41-43.
Schäfer, D. 2002, Geographische Informationssysteme (GIS) im Erdkundeunterricht. 9. Deutschsprachige ESRI
Anwenderkonferenz, Konferenz-CD. Essen.
Schäfer, D. 2007a, GIS-Projekte - ein Gewinn für den Erdkundeunterricht? IN Jekel, T., Koller, A. & Strobl, J.
(Eds.) Lernen mit Geoinformation II. Wichmann 162-170.
Schäfer, D. 2007b, Skalierbarer Einsatz von Geographischen Informationssystemen (GIS) in Schulen. 3. GIS
Ausbildungstagung, 07./08. Juni 2007, Konferenz-CD. Potsdam.
Schäfer, F. 2005a, Arbeiten mit dem GIS-Nationalatlas USA, Eine GIS-gestützte Einführung in die
Landwirtschaft der USA. Geographie heute, 26 (233), 22-25.
Schäfer, F. 2005b, Bevölkerungsgeographie mit GIS-Datensätzen, HIV in Afrika. Geographie heute, 26 (233),
36-39.
Schallhorn, E. (Ed.) 2004, Erdkunde Didaktik. Praxishandbuch für die Sekundarstufe I und II, Berlin
Schleicher, Y. 2007, Lernen mit Geoinformation - Potenzial zum Erreichen von Bildungsstandards? IN Jekel, T.,
Koller, A. & Strobl, J. (Eds.) Lernen mit Geoinformation II. Heidelberg, Wichmann 20-31.
Schwab, A. & Kussmaul, G. 2005, Thematische Karten mit GIS erstellen und auswerten, Anregungen für eine
Untersuchung der Bevölkerungsentwicklung im Nahraum (Beispiel Bodensee-Oberschwaben).
Geographie heute, 26 (229), 38-45.
Senator für Bildung und Wissenschaft 2001, Geographie. Rahmenplan für die Sekundarstufe II gymnasiale
Oberstufe, http://lehrplan.bremen.de/sek2a/aufgabenfeld2/geographie/rahmenplan/download [Accessed:
2007-07-19]
Senator für Bildung und Wissenschaft 2006, Welt-Umweltkunde, Geschichte, Geografie, Politik Bildungsplan
für das Gymnasium Jahrgangsstufe 5 - 10, http://lehrplan.bremen.de/sek1/wuk/wuk_gy_5bis10/
download [Accessed: 2007-07-10].
Siegmund, A. 2001, Die GIS-Layertechnik. Von der Karte zum selbst gefertigten "Hardware-GIS". Geographie
heute, 22 (195), 22-26.
Siegmund, A. 2002, Neue und traditionelle Medien im Geographieunterricht, Medienverbund als Chance für
handlungsorientiertes Lernen. Praxis Geographie, 32 (6), 4-8.
Unterthurner, H. 2004, GIS-Projekt „Hotelführer Meran“ – Eine Kooperation mit Partnern außerhalb der Schule.
Praxis Geographie, 34 (2), 28-31.
USGS 2005, Geographic Information Systems in Education, http://rockyweb.cr.usgs.gov/outreach/
gis_gps_rs_in_education_fs.pdf [Accessed: 2007-07-10].
Vogler, A. 2007, Reich wie ein Scheich - Öl in Arabien, http://gis2.esri.com/industries/education/
arclessons/search_results.cfm?id=311 [Accessed: 2007-07-11].
Zürl, B. 2005, „GIS - was ist das?“ Geographie heute, 26 (233), 8-11.