MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905073202 · doi:10.5206/tips.v8i1.6219

Using Problem-Based Learning (PBL) to Teach Geographic Information Science

2018· article· en· W2905073202 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heather Peacock

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching Innovation Projects · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeography and Education Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProblem-based learningGeographic information systemCuriosityVisualizationField (mathematics)Process (computing)Data scienceManagement scienceMathematics educationKnowledge managementArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPsychologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geographic Information Science (GIScience) is a field of study that investigates the development and use of theories, methods, technology, and data for understanding geographic processes, relationships, and patterns (Mark, 2003). Students in the discipline learn the conceptual and technical implementation of Geographic Information Systems (GIS; the analysis, storage, visualization, and management of geographic data). However, GIScience undergraduates often struggle to relate GIS theory to technical practice. In particular, students have difficulty mastering GIS tools and software and they are not well-equipped to determine the series of processes/tools required to complete geoprocessing tasks without prompts. GIScience courses commonly provide students with detailed step-by-step instructions on how to execute various GIS tools in order to solve example problems but students are eventually expected to perform the same or similar problem-solving tasks without detailed instructions. This workshop focuses on how to teach the technical and problem-solving skills required in GIScience courses effectively by employing a problem-based learning (PBL) model. PBL is an active learning method that increases understanding and competency. The approach focuses on problem solving, self-directed learning, team participation and cooperation (Pawson et al., 2006). PBL encourages students to use critical thinking, engages their curiosity to solve real-world problems, and promotes inquiry and interest in the subject matter (Pawson et al., 2006). A PBL approach encourages students to collaboratively solve problems in GIScience by first identifying the general steps to solve the problem and then solve those problems by determining the tools needed to process the data to come to a solution (Melero, 2010). Incorporating PBL into GIScience courses enables students to solve a larger variety of problems, promotes stronger retention of skills and theory, and better prepares them for future professional opportunities and/or academic research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching Innovation ProjectsSame topicGeography and Education MethodsFrench-language works237,207