GIS Textbook Content as a Basis for Skill Development in Map Interpretation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has noted that enrolments in US map-interpretation courses have been declining since the mid-1980s. One reason for this could be the rise and development of GIS technology and its implementation in the curricula of many universities. In this situation, GIS courses may play a dual role, both directly siphoning away potential map-interpretation students and offering an alternative venue for those wishing to develop map-interpretation skills. This study investigates the materials available in 13 current GIS textbooks and tutorials with respect to the inclusion of map-interpretation and cartographic topics. The findings suggest that these materials contain a significant amount of map-interpretation and cartographic content. The prevalence of each topic varies by source. Based on the degree of prevalence, four groups of topics were defined. The findings suggest that GIS courses may be an alternative avenue for students seeking to obtain or improve their map-interpretation skills. However, textbook choice will play a certain role in the process of reaching these goals. Une recherche antérieure a noté une chute des taux d'inscriptions à des cours d'interprétation cartographique aux États Unis depuis le milieu des années 1980. Une raison de ce déclin serait la montée et le développement des technologies du SIG et leur ajout au curriculum de nombreuses universités. Dans ce cas, les cours de SIG pourraient jouer un double rôle, en détournant vers les SIG des étudiants potentiellement intéressés par l'interprétation cartographique et en offrant une autre possibilité à ceux qui désirent perfectionner leurs aptitudes en matière d'interprétation cartographique. Dans l'étude, on passe en revue le matériel contenu dans 13 manuels ou tutoriels sur les SIG pour évaluer le contenu relatif à l'interprétation des cartes et des sujets cartographiques. Les résultats laissent croire que ces ouvrages contiennent une grande quantité de matière sur l'interprétation des cartes et la cartographie. La fréquence de chaque sujet varie d'une source à l'autre. D'après ces fréquences, trois groupes de sujets ont été définis. Les résultats suggèrent aussi que les cours de SIG représentent une autre possibilité pour les étudiants voulant améliorer leurs aptitudes en matière d'interprétation cartographique. Toutefois, le choix du manuel joue un certain rôle dans la manière d'atteindre cet objectif.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".