A constructivist approach to using GIS in the New Zealand classroom

Geo-Ed

A constructivist approach to using GIS in theNew Zealand classroomnzg_1174 74..84

John KinniburghThe King’s School, PO Box 1, Parramatta NSW 2124, Australia

Abstract: The development of the revised New Zealand Curriculum provides anexcellent opportunity to investigate GIS-based learning pedagogies within the socialsciences classroom. The new curriculum privileges inquiry-based activities with amore participatory approach to learning, providing students with greater autonomy intheir studies. This paper emphasises the value of GIS technology for extendingstudent learning when situated within a problem-based learning (PBL) framework.Using GIS, students undertake geographic inquiry through meaningful learninggrounded in constructivist learning theory. PBL is well suited as an instructionalstrategy for integrating GIS as students actively learn when presented with authentic,real-world problems.

Key words: coastal erosion, GIS, inquiry learning, New Zealand Curriculum, PBL,social sciences.

The development of the revised New ZealandCurriculum provides an excellent opportunityto investigate Geographic Information Systems(GIS)-based teaching and learning strategieswithin the social sciences classroom. In therevised curriculum framework, there is a con-sistent message focusing upon students ‘learn-ing to learn’, and as noted by Hipkins (2008),many teachers in New Zealand now see inquirylearning as an effective teaching method.Students are encouraged to become ‘lifelonglearners’ with a greater emphasis on studentautonomy. School-based curriculum design ismore explicit, and the curriculum has a moreholistic approach that connects knowledgeacross learning areas. Added to this is a moreparticipatory approach to learning with theview that it is not just enough to have knowl-edge, but one must be able to use it.

The first outcome-based curriculum wasimplemented in New Zealand from 1992. Sincethen, a significant social change has occurredresulting in an increasingly diverse population,more sophisticated technologies and morecomplex workplace demands. In response, areview of the curriculum was undertaken from2000 to 2002. Following a lengthy developmentand consultation process, the New ZealandCurriculum (2007) was released. All stateschools are expected to base their teaching andlearning programmes on the document fromthe start of 2010, following a transition periodin 2008 and 2009. The implementation of therevised curriculum is phased with level 1 to beimplemented in 2011, followed by level 2 in2012, and so forth.

Eight learning areas, with associated achieve-ment objectives, and including technology,

Note about the author: John Kinniburgh is Head of Geography at The King’s School, Parramatta. He has usedGIS in the Geography classroom since 1998, and is an advocate for its role in fostering active learningenvironments for students.

E-mail: [email protected]

New Zealand Geographer (2010) 66, 74–84

© 2010 The AuthorJournal compilation © 2010 The New Zealand Geographical Society

doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7939.2010.01174.x

have been identified. The learning associatedwith each area is part of a broad, general edu-cation that lays the foundation for later spe-cialisation. One of the key learning areas issocial sciences, which is taught in New Zealandschools from years 1 to 13. While the learningarea is typically integrative in years 1–10 (associal studies), individual social sciences aretaught in the senior secondary school years(years 11–13) (Aitken & Sinnema 2008).Throughout years 1–13, student outcomes areassessed using achievement objectives fromlevels 1 to 8. Levels 1–4 are typically addressedin primary and intermediate school (years 1–8).Year 9 normally signals the commencement ofhigh school (level 5). At levels 6–8, studentsmay specialise in one or more social sciencedisciplines including social studies, economics,geography and history.

The social sciences learning area offers arange of conceptual strands including identity,culture and organisation; place and environ-ment; continuity and change; and the economicworld. There is an increased focus on studentsattaining ‘deeper understanding’ (Hipkins2008), and inquiry in social sciences has beenidentified as a means of achieving this(Baldwin 2008). Simple knowledge of facts ormastery of discrete skills is not considered suf-ficient, and traditional views of teaching thatinvolve expeditious delivery of knowledge andcontent are to be challenged. Zohar (2006,p. 1586) noted that ‘one of the hallmarks ofteaching for understanding is to seek rich andmultidimensional connections between schoolsubject matter and students’ lives, and specifi-cally with the initial concepts students form bytheir life experiences’. These tenets are rein-forced in Effective Pedagogy in Social Sciences/TikangaaIwi (Aitken & Sinnema 2008), whichinvestigates evidence about ways in whichpedagogical practices can improve outcomesfor diverse learners in the social sciences. Thereport identifies four mechanisms that facili-tate learning in the social sciences: connection,alignment, community and interest. Thesemechanisms, together with associated adviceand elaborations, are designed to assist teach-ers to develop their teaching and learningstrategies (Table 1).

An effective method of achieving learningoutcomes in social sciences is to partner

inquiry with a powerful learning technologysuch as a GIS. Teachers, however, need to beclear about the purposes for which they areusing GIS, and what they want their studentsto get out of it.

The focus of this paper is to outline a teach-ing and learning framework that integratesinquiry with GIS, within the context of therevised New Zealand Curriculum. Firstly, GISwill be situated within contemporary learningtheory and two constructivist teaching meth-odologies, inquiry-based learning (IBL) andproblem-based learning (PBL). An outline ofa senior teaching unit (years 11–13), con-structed using a PBL framework, and whichintegrates GIS, is then provided. Whilefocused within the social sciences learningarea, this unit is multidisciplinary in its natureand can be broadened to incorporate knowl-edge from other disciplines. The learningactivity presents a hypothetical ‘problem’ inwhich students adopt the role of coastal plan-ning consultants who are employed by thelocal council of a small coastal community.The students are required to investigate thesuitability of different ‘development’ optionsalong a coastal area that is regularly subject tocoastal erosion.

Table 1 Causal mechanisms and associatedadvice for facilitating learning in the social

science area

Mechanisms Advice for teachers

Connection • Draw on relevant content• Ensure inclusive content

Alignment • Identify prior knowledge• Align activities and resources to

intended outcomes• Provide opportunities to revisit

concepts and learning processes• Attend to the learning of

individual studentsCommunity • Establish productive

teacher–student relationships• Promote dialogue• Share power with students

Interest • Meet diverse motivational needs• Maximise student interest• Use a variety of activities

Source: Aitken and Sinnema (2008, p. 225).

Constructivist approach to using GIS 75


The potential of GISin the classroom

The importance of spatial analysis andmapping skills in the education of geographershas been recognised for decades. No othertechniques, however, have been as influentialto the development of spatial analysis in geog-raphy as GIS. When applied effectively, thistechnology has the potential to facilitateresearch-based investigations integrating themajor traditions of geography, including thespatial and temporal distribution of phenom-ena, processes and features, as well as theinteraction of humans and their environment.In its simplest sense, a GIS is a database withmapping capabilities. It can capture, store,check, analyse and display geographic infor-mation that is spatially referenced to theearth’s surface. Support for GIS within (US)K-12 classrooms has grown since the early1990s (Alibrandi & Baker 2008), and themerits of the technology have been widelyadvocated (Audet & Abegg 1996; Kerski 2003;van der Schee 2003). GIS is a technology thatcan foster contextually rich student learningand aid in-depth analysis, giving greatermeaning to the work of student researchers(Baker & White 2003).

A study undertaken by OFSTED (2004),investigating ICT use in UK schools, found thatsome of the best work being done within sec-ondary geography classrooms was with GIS.The report outlined the benefits, includingenabling pupils to explore patterns and rela-tionships, to test hypotheses, analyse largequantities of data and recognise that the inter-pretation of large quantities of data is complexand yields a range of possible answers.As notedby Audet and Paris (1997), the features of a GISwhich fascinate educators are its ability toswiftly and dynamically represent the worldand its issues from a variety of perspectives.Thediverse functionality of a GIS provides a newteaching and learning tool for teachers toconduct problem-solving activities in the class-room, and for students to explore geographicissues and enhance their spatial cognition andgeographic learning (Liu & Zhu 2008). GIS canaid the acquisition of standard-based knowl-edge, because of its suitability for constructivistand inquiry-oriented methods of analysis

(Kerski 1999), a claim supported by Bednarz(2004).

The potential of GIS is yet to be fully realisedwithin social sciences education. According toBednarz and Van Der Schee, ‘the technologyhas not been adopted by educators at a ratecommensurate with expectations’ (2006, p.192). Kerski’s (2001) seminal study found thatless than 1% of American high schools hadadopted the technology despite the efforts ofnumerous motivated and innovative teachers.In a survey of stage 5 geography teachers inNew South Wales, Kinniburgh (2008) foundthat 42% of respondents indicated their schoolowned some form of GIS software, but it wasnot being used at all. A further 37% indicatedthat one or more teachers were investigatingGIS, but it was not being used in the classroom.Not one respondent indicated that GIS wasbeing used on a regular basis (i.e. three timesper term).

GIS technology can be an invaluableresource for extending student learning when aproper instructional framework is provided,along with data analysis and spatial reasoningconcepts (Baker & White 2003; van der Schee2003). As noted by various researchers includ-ing Sui (1995) and Kerski (2000), there is a lackof a pedagogical framework for using GIS ineducation. Kemp et al. (1992) noted that thiswas due partly to the rapidity with which GIShas been added to the geography curriculum.A better focus is needed on the development ofa framework that fully enables the potentialof GIS to support contemporary pedagogy andrationales for learning.

Pedagogy and constructivistlearning environments (CLEs)

Various alternatives to traditional, teacher-centred instructional frameworks haveemerged in contemporary education, includingmethodologies based upon constructivist learn-ing theory. The underlying premise of construc-tivism is that learning is an active process inwhich learners are effective sense makers whoseek to build coherent and organised knowl-edge. Passive media include books, lectures andon-line presentations. These are classified asnon-constructivist teaching, whereas activemethods including group discussions, hands-on

J. Kinniburgh76


activities and interactive games, which are clas-sified as constructivist teaching (Mayer 2004).

A complementary relationship appears toexist between computer technologies and con-structivism, the implementation of each ben-efiting the other (Nanjappa and Grant 2003).The focus of both is the creation of CLEs(Jonassen et al. 1999). Technology that is rel-evant and immersed within a CLE can affordstudents the tools to explore, inquire, experi-ment, construct, converse and reflect on whatthey are doing, so that they learn from theirexperiences. Learning environments supportedby technology embody meaningful learning bydesign, and must engage learners in active, con-structivist, intentional, authentic and coopera-tive learning. McClintock (1992) argues that ina CLE, technology plays an acknowledged andpurposeful role in day-to-day activities, butdoes not become the object of instruction. Iftechnologies are used to support learning, thenthey should not be used as delivery vehicles.They should instead be used as engagers andfacilitators of thinking and knowledge con-struction (Jonassen et al. 1999).

Jonassen (2000) provides psychological, edu-cational and practical justifications for usingcomputers as tools for thinking. As cited byFinger et al. (2007), he places a strong emphasison learning with computers by proposing theuse of ICT as cognitive tools (which he refers toas mind tools) for engaging and enhancing mul-tiple forms of thinking in learners. Computer-based mind tools engage students by acting asintellectual partners, and by sharing the cogni-tive burden of undertaking tasks, they scaffoldnew forms of thinking and reasoning in thelearner’s zone of proximal development. Thus,meaningful learning is seen as being active, con-structive, intentional, authentic and coopera-tive (Jonassen et al. 1999).

This provides a contrasting view to produc-tivity tools (Jonassen 2000), which involve, forexample, using a word processor to completeassignments. While useful in some contexts,Jonassen (2000) argues that ICT should be usedas mind tools or intellectual partners thatenhance the learners’ ability to think, ratherthan simply act as productivity tools. There areseveral classes of mind tools including semanticorganisation tools, dynamic modelling tools,information interpretation tools, knowledge

construction tools and conversation and col-laboration tools. A number of these can beidentified as being inherent functions of a GIS.

Within a GIS-based learning environment,students undertake geographic inquiry by for-mulating geographic questions or hypotheses,often associated with problems or issues. Theyare able to access and obtain knowledge andgeographic data from multiple sources; presentgeographic data and information in forms ofmaps, images, tables and charts; explore thedata through carefully constructed queries; andanalyse it to encourage critical thinking anddraw conclusions. Inherently, GIS technology isof no value unless the student takes the role ofthe active learner by querying the data con-tained within the GIS database. In doing so,they are ‘actively building knowledge struc-tures, because they are actively engaged inknowledge representation activities. Learnerscan also try to arrange the information in waysthat may make more sense to them’ (Jonassen1996, p. 65). GIS can, therefore, be classified asa mind tool as it explicitly immerses students inactive learning tasks and encourages them tothink critically to solve problems.

Developing spatial literacy withspatial thinking

There are many forms of thinking includingword-based, logical, metaphorical, hypotheti-cal, mathematical, statistical and so forth. Theycan be distinguished in terms of their represen-tational system. For example, word-basedthinking uses linguistic symbols, and math-ematical thinking uses mathematical symbols.They can also use a system of reasoning, suchas logic and metaphor, and in any domain ofknowledge, multiple forms of thinking are used.Science, for example, uses many forms includ-ing linguistic, hypothetical, mathematical andlogical. Another form of thinking is spatialthinking, which is essentially a collection ofcognitive skills. Many of the daily operations ineveryday life and in the workplace dependupon successful problem-solving skills, of whichspatial thinking is integral.

There are essentially three key elements tospatial thinking including: (i) concepts of space,for example, the relationships between units ofmeasurement, proximity between features, etc.;



(ii) tools of representation, for example, maps,multidimensional scaling models; and (iii) pro-cesses of reasoning, for example, estimating theslope of a hill from a contour map, deciding totake an alternative detour during heavy traffic(NRC 2006). An individual proficient in spatialthinking skills, and who is therefore spatiallyliterate, is someone who:

• Has the ability to know where, when, howand why to think spatially;

• Has a broad and deep knowledge of spatialconcepts and spatial representations, has acommand over spatial reasoning using avariety of spatial ways of thinking and actingand is capable of using supporting tools andtechnologies; and

• Can use spatial data to construct, articulateand defend a line of reasoning or point ofview in solving problems and in answeringquestions (NRC 2006).

As reported by the Geography EducationStandards Project (1994, p. 256), a GIS is anintegrated system of hardware, software andprocedures designed to support the collection,management, manipulation, analysis, modellingand display of spatially referenced data aboutthe earth’s surface in order to solve complexplanning and management problems. Thepower of a GIS is that it allows the user to askquestions of data and to perform spatial opera-tions on geographic information contained indatabases. GIS can assist the user to answer keyquestions including: What is at . . . ?, Whereis . . . ?, What has changed since . . . ?, Whatspatial patterns exist . . . ? and What if . . . ? Itsroutines mirror many of the functions andoperations of spatial thinking.

Constructivist teachingframeworks

Situating GIS within an appropriate instruc-tional framework is important if its functional-ity and potential are to be realised in theclassroom. As far back as 1995, it was noted bySui (1995) that in order for GIS to become fullyincorporated into current geography curricula,it was essential that it be taught in context. Hecategorised the use of GIS in education in twoways. Firstly, teaching about GIS implies that

the technology is peripheral to intellectualcores of geography and other disciplines, andtherefore is taught as a technical field with acollection of marketable skills. Secondly, teach-ing with GIS stresses geographic concepts andusing the tool to solve geographic problems in avariety of disciplines.The lack of understandingabout a consistent pedagogical framework foreither teaching with or about GIS has also beenhighlighted by Kerski (2000).

Constructivist learning approaches stress theimportance of learners being engaged in con-structing their own knowledge (Palincsar 1998;Mayer 2004; Hmelo-Silver et al. 2007). Twopedagogical approaches that are recognised assupporting the key tenets of constructivistphilosophy are IBL and PBL. According toSpronken-Smith et al. (2008), both IBL andPBL fall within the realm of active learningand inquiry, and PBL is a subset of IBL.

IBL has its origins in the practices of scien-tific inquiry, and emphasises the posing of ques-tions, gathering and analysing data andconstructing evidence-based arguments (Kuhnet al. 2000; Krajcik & Blumenfeld 2006; Hmelo-Silver et al. 2007). Originating in medicalschools in the 1960s, one of the fundamentalideas behind PBL is that students faced with achallenging problem will identify the conceptsthey need to learn, be motivated to learn themand reinforce the learning through applicationto the problem they are solving (Tulloch &Graff 2007).

Both approaches are predicated on studentsconstructing learning for themselves toenhance understanding. However, in IBL, theknowledge to be developed must often beacquired first before investigation of the issuetakes place. An example is in-class learningprior to undertaking fieldwork. In contrast,PBL is ‘problem first learning’ (Spencer &Jordan 1999) with the problem, usually set bythe teacher, defining what is to be learned. Theonus is on students determining their ownlearning needs and on independence of enquiry(Pawson et al. 2006, p. 105).

GIS technology was not developed for edu-cation with the constructivist philosophy inmind, but it does provide a useful tool tosupport active and meaningful learning.Appro-priate teaching and learning frameworks thatintegrate GIS must therefore be adopted if stu-

J. Kinniburgh78


dents are to engage critically and develop theirhigher-order thinking skills. The number oftopics potentially available for investigationusing GIS is diverse, and careful thought mustbe given to the nature of the topic and the keylearning objectives to be achieved.

Integrating GIS and PBL

Gagné (1980, p. 85) believed that ‘the centralpoint of education is to teach people to think, touse their rational powers, to become betterproblem solvers’. PBL is well suited as aninstructional strategy in this respect as itencourages students to actively participate intheir learning. In doing so, students ‘learn tolearn’, which is an important goal of the revisedNew Zealand Curriculum. PBL begins with aproblem, teaching facts and skills in a relevantcontext, and students actively participate byhelping plan, organise and evaluate theproblem-solving process. As a result, activelearning occurs with students being required tosolve authentic, real-world problems. Workingcooperatively in groups, the problems are oftenopen-ended with many correct answerspossible (Centre for Problem-based Learning2000).

An advantage of PBL is that it encouragesstudents to collaborate between disciplines, andthere is significant potential for this to occur inthe revised New Zealand Curriculum frame-work. By integrating knowledge from differentfields, student experiences are enhancedthrough the synthesising of this knowledgefrom other disciplines (Pawson et al. 2006).Spronken-Smith noted that ‘although it is rela-tively new in geography, one could argue thatthe technique (PBL) is ideally suited to thisdiscipline because, by its very nature, geogra-phy is already interdisciplinary’ (2005, p. 206).Pawson et al. (2006) clarified this by suggestingthat geography texts often deal with topics in aset sequence including, for example, tropicalcyclones, coastal erosion and tourism. A multi-dimensional PBL scenario, centred on thedevelopment of a resort complex on a barrierisland, would enable students to explore therange of interconnections between these topics,at the same time making the deeper point thatlife is not neatly divided into discrete chapters.

The teaching unit outlined below is con-structed using a PBL framework, integratingGIS. While primarily drawn from the social sci-ences learning area, the unit is multidisciplinaryin its nature and could be broadened to incor-porate knowledge from other disciplines.Students are presented with a hypothetical‘problem’ in which they must adopt the role ofcoastal planning consultants, employed by thelocal council of a small coastal community.They are required to investigate the potentialthreat of coastal erosion as the community islow lying and regularly threatened by waveerosion and storm surges. The students’company has been employed to assess theextent of the erosion risk. Using GIS and otherresources, the findings of the investigations willassist the council in their future planning forthe area.

The GIS-based unit of work has been devel-oped using the principles outlined in therevised New Zealand Curriculum. Theseprovide the foundations by which all curricu-lum decisions should be made, and theyembody beliefs about what is desirable within aschool curriculum.The most important elementof this is to ‘put students at the centre of teach-ing and learning’ (Ministry of Education 2007,p. 9). The principles assert that the studentsshould ‘experience a curriculum that engagesand challenges them, is forward-looking andinclusive’ (p. 9). The unit of work is particularlyconsistent with two of these principles, learningto learn and coherence. As the project uses aPBL framework, students are able to reflect ontheir own learning processes at different stagesin the activity. In doing so, they are learning tolearn. The task also integrates knowledge andunderstanding from different domains, and as aresult, there is coherence between each learningarea. The result of this is that students maychoose to further explore these learning areasif they wish.

The project is designed to address a numberof the key competencies identified within therevised New Zealand Curriculum. Studentthinking is necessary to develop understandingof the issue of coastal erosion. Decisions canthen be made that will ultimately shape theiractions in applying effective management strat-egies. Students are expected to draw on priorknowledge, ask questions and challenge their



assumptions about coastal management. Theyare required to use a variety of language,symbols and texts including books and Internetresources, digital images and aerial photo-graphs (used to assess, e.g. coastline changesover time). The PBL framework ensuresthat effective management of self and self-motivation are necessary for this unit of workto be completed competently, given the open-ended nature of the problem posed. Studentswill need to effectively relate to others, particu-larly if a group work approach is adopted. Byconsidering the opinions of others in theirgroups, students are enabled to understand theperceptions of other individuals and their dif-fering points of views. This is essential in themanagement of any issue and provides studentswith experience in listening actively, negotiat-ing and sharing ideas: skills likely to be neededin different vocational contexts.

This GIS-based teaching unit is supportive ofthe four mechanisms that facilitate learning inthe social science learning area (Table 1). Itdraws on content (connection) that is relevantand meaningful to students. Coastal erosionand development planning are important issuesin many environments where population pres-sures are in direct conflict with environmentalprocesses. The activities and resources arealigned to the intended outcomes (alignment).The PBL framework promotes dialoguebetween students (community). Finally, there ispotential for significant interest to be generatedby students as the activity is multidimensionaland draws on a range of different activities.

A GIS-based learning activitysituated within a PBL framework

Since 2000, year 11 geography students at TheKing’s School, Parramatta (Sydney) haveinvestigated the issue of storm erosion withinthe Narrabeen and Collaroy coastal area alongSydney’s northern beaches as part of theirSenior Geography Project. The area has a longhistory of storm erosion, and this has beenexacerbated by extensive foredune develop-ment. The students use GIS to create oceaninundation scenarios, and in the last 2 years,their investigation has been framed using PBL.The GIS-based activity embedded within thePBL framework generates significant student

interest. They are engaged by the powerfultechnology and the ability to create various‘what-if?’ scenarios. From this, valid manage-ment solutions can be proposed.

Before commencing the activity, a number ofpreparation and implementation factors haveto be considered. The teacher role is one ofproviding informal guidance to students, andonly giving assistance where necessary. Stu-dents should be encouraged to reflect criticallyon what they do.The activity should begin at ornear the beginning of term so that it is infusedin class culture. It is likely to take 4–6 weeks tocomplete so appropriate time should be allo-cated and relevant resources made availablesuch as computer rooms and buses for field-work if necessary.Authentic assessment mecha-nisms that mirror the problem-solving processwith marking criteria need to be clearlyoutlined.

Students will need to perform basic GIStasks, as well as more advanced spatial analysisusing GIS functions. In particular, they willneed to know how to import and manipulateGIS data, as well as be able to complete GISanalysis procedures. They will therefore needprior knowledge and experience with usingGIS. The GIS data sets necessary to completethis activity include aerial photography andeither a digital elevation model (DEM) orcontour data. The activity was developed usingESRI’s ArcGIS 9.X and Spatial Analystextension.

Discussion

The integration of GIS within the social sci-ences classroom has gained considerablesupport since the early 1990s. When appliedeffectively, GIS has the potential to facilitateresearch-based investigations and encourageinquiry learning, but its potential is yet to befully realised in the social sciences classroom.There has been a clear lack of teaching andlearning strategies for using the technology inthe classroom.

This paper situates a similar GIS-basedlearning activity within the context of therevised New Zealand Curriculum. There is anexcellent opportunity to investigate GIS-basedlearning pedagogies as the new curriculumprivileges IBL. There is a greater focus on

J. Kinniburgh80


Box 1 Assessing the vulnerability of a coastal community tothe threat of coastal erosion

Step 1 – Introduction

• Students are introduced to the project through introductory teaching units and lessons. Video resources andexcursions to coastal areas may be appropriate.

• The philosophy and benefits of PBL are explained. It is essential that students are made aware of‘open-ended’ nature of the activity, and that there are likely to be multiple solutions to the problem.

• The teacher may assign students to groups or allow the students to select their own group.• Students are also made aware of what they are expected to produce, for example, is the outcome a written

report, Website, poster or oral presentation?

Step 2 – The Problem

• Students should discuss the problem and list its significant component parts.• Participation in the project will require students to gather information and learn new concepts, principles or

skills as they engage in the problem-solving process. As a result, they are likely to feel challenged by theirlack of understanding about the topic and should be re-assured.

The Problem:

Background: Haven Beach is a small beachside community situated along a spectacular stretch of coastline2 h from the nearest large city. The area has visually stunning beaches, as well as crystal clear waters that arehome to dolphins and whales, making it a favourite destination for lovers of nature. Haven Beach is alsoknown for its fantastic surf conditions, great fishing spots and excellent waters for recreational boating. It hasa number of sensitive wetlands in which rare native birds nest throughout the year. The town does not havelarge crowds of beachgoers, although it does contain a number of investment properties from people whovisit on the weekend and during holidays. The community is a haven by name and by nature.

The Problem: For many years, Haven Beach has remained relatively untouched and free of developers – untilnow. The local council recognises that there are significant economic benefits if appropriate developmentstake place. In the past, however, improper foredune development has resulted in numerous beachfrontproperties being built within the active beach zone, and severe damage to houses and property has occurredduring major winter storms. Haven Beach is one of the top three beaches in the country most susceptible tostorm erosion. The local council now has strict controls over development along the beachfront.

The Task: Students are to adopt the role of coastal planning consultants to the council. They are required toinvestigate the suitability of different ‘development’ options. The students’ company has been employed toassess the risk of inundation and erosion caused by storm erosion, and evaluate the best development option.They will use GIS, as well as other resources, to complete the project and the results will assist the councilin their future planning for the area.

Step 3 – Planning

• Students may wish to produce a ‘fictional’ profile of their company, and themselves as employees: thishelps to give each group ownership of the project.

• The group should define the problem, rewrite their understanding of it and produce a statement of theirgoals and objectives. They should also identify the critical factors such as:

– Where is the risk of coastal erosion the greatest?– What is the probable risk of storm erosion affecting buildings and other human features in the

community?– How can the risk be reduced?

• The group should identify the activities that need to be taken to solve the problem. This may be bestachieved by drawing a flow chart. Individuals may be assigned to each action including timelines forcompletion of investigation. They will need to consider the resources needed to resolve the problem:text-based, websites, databases, Google Earth, newspaper articles, meetings with specialists such asplanners and appropriate fieldwork.



• Groups should investigate available GIS data sets, and acquire or create new GIS data layers if necessary(from public agencies, or scanned data, or from fieldwork). If access to the GIS data is via a network, it isimportant that the data be set up using, for example, File Geodatabases so that the data are easily accessedand distributed across the network.

• Groups should consider the type of analyses that they will need to perform on the GIS data. These mayinclude:

– Converting the contour data to a digital elevation model (DEM)– Reclassifying the DEM to reflect different sea levels and storm inundation levels– Creating new layers highlighting sensitive or important areas– Importing GPS data– Creating buffer zones around the coastal areas, wetlands or the town– Overlaying and combining layers

Step 4 – Analysis

• Groups conduct the tasks necessary to complete the activity. These include:

– Researching and examining relevant information from different resources– Completing the GIS analysis in the computer lab

• A series of maps are produced to show the vulnerability of the area to storm erosion and inundation.• Vulnerable areas should be ranked depending on their level of risk.

Step 5 – Solutions and Recommendations

• Groups should meet to discuss the problem and determine the recommendations that they will make tocouncil to address the problem.

• They should also justify their recommendations.

Step 6 – Reporting and Presentation of findings

• Groups should combine their results and recommendations, collating them in the form of a finalpresentation. This may take the form of a written report, website, poster or oral presentation.

• Groups should summarise the process used, options considered and difficulties encountered. In particular,the product should include the problem statement, questions, data gathered, analysis of data and therecommendations produced.

Step 7 – Debriefing Exercise

• Groups conduct a debriefing exercise in which they review their work and learn from what they have notdone well.

• They should also reflect and analyse the effectiveness of their investigation, and evaluate the way in whichthe activity was conducted.

J. Kinniburgh82


student autonomy, and the teaching unit out-lined in this paper encourages active participa-tion in the learning process, as highlighted bythe Australian example. GIS-based investiga-tions are supportive of constructivist learningtheory, and when combined with authentic,real-world problems (as well as a supportivecurriculum), effective student learning can takeplace. The unit has been developed over a10-year period, and has been outlined here inline with the revised national curriculum’sguiding principles and key competencies.

It is no longer appropriate for students tobe taught using traditional methods that focusupon the direct dissemination of knowledgeand facts. Students should be able to exploretheir topic areas with encouragement and flex-ibility so that their learning experience is validand worthwhile. This paper has shown howGIS-based learning activities are an obviousconstructivist tool supportive of these tenetsand how the technology can improve out-comes for diverse learners in the social sci-ences. The open-ended nature of the learningactivity allows for multidimensional interac-tions to be explored between different learn-ing areas and at the same time students areexposed to a powerful and exciting informa-tion and communication technology in theform of GIS.

References

Aitken G, Sinnema C (2008). Effective Pedagogy inSocial Sciences: TikangaaIwi BES. IterativeBest Evidence Synthesis Programme,Wellington.

Alibrandi M, Baker TR (2008). A social history ofGIS in education, 1985–2007. In: Milson AJ, Ali-brandi M, eds. Digital Geography: GeospatialTechnologies in the Social Studies Classroom.Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC,p. 3.

Audet RH, Abegg GL (1996). Geographic informa-tion systems: Implications for problem solving.Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33,22–45.

Audet R, Paris J (1997). GIS implementation modelfor schools: Assessing the critical concerns.Journal of Geography 96, 293–300.

Baker TR, White SH (2003). The effects of GIS onstudents’ attitudes, self-efficacy, and achieve-ment in middle school science classrooms.Journal of Geography 102, 243–54.

Baldwin R (2008). Social Sciences in the NewZealand Curriculum. University of Canterbury,Christchurch.

Bednarz SW (2004). Geographic informationsystems: A tool to support geography andenvironmental education? GeoJournal 60, 191–99.

Bednarz SW, Van Der Schee J (2006). Europe andthe United States: The implementation of geo-graphic information systems in secondary edu-cation in two contexts. Technology, Pedagogyand Education 15, 191–205.

Centre for Problem-based Learning (2000). What IsProblem-based Learning? Samford University,Birmingham, AL.

Finger G, Russell G, Jamieson-Procter R, Russell N(2007). Transforming Learning with ICT: MakingIT Happen. Pearson Education, Frenchs Forest.

Gagné R (1980). The Conditions of Learning. Holt,Rinehart & Winston, New York.

Geography Education Standards Project (1994).Geography for Life: The National GeographyStandards. National Geographic SocietyCommittee on Research and Exploration,Washington, DC.

Hipkins DR (2008). Inquiry Learning and Key Com-petencies: Perfect Match or Problematic Part-ners? CORE Breakfast Seminar. New ZealandCouncil for Educational Research, Wellington.

Hmelo-Silver CE, Golan Duncan R, Chinn CA(2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kir-schner, Sweller and Clark (2006). EducationalPsychologist 42, 99–107.

Jonassen DH (1996). Computers in the Classroom:Mindtools for Critical Thinking. Prentice-Hall,Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Jonassen DH (2000). Computers as Mindtools forSchools Engaging Critical Thinking. MerrillPrentice Hall, Columbus, OH.

Jonassen DH, Peck KL, Wilson BG (1999). Learningwith Technology: A Constructivist Perspective.Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Kemp K, Goodchild M, et al. (1992). Teaching GIS inGeography. The Professional Geographer 44(2),181–191.

Kerski JJ (1999). A nationwide analysis of the imple-mentation of GIS in high school education. ESRIEducation User Conference, ESRI, SanDiego, CA.

Kerski JJ (2000). The Implementation and Effective-ness of Geographic Information Systems Tech-nology and Methods in Secondary Education.Department of Geography, University of Colo-rado, Boulder, CO.

Kerski JJ (2001). A national assessment of GIS inAmerican high schools. International Research inGeographical and Environmental Education 10,72–84.



Kerski JJ (2003). The implementation and effective-ness of geographic information systems technol-ogy and methods in secondary education.Journal of Geography 102, 128–37.

Kinniburgh JC (2008). An investigation of theimpediments to using geographical informationsystems (GIS) to enhance teaching and learningin mandatory stage 5 Geography in New SouthWales. Geographical Education 21, 20–38.

Krajcik J, Blumenfeld P (2006). Project-based learn-ing. In: Sawyer R, ed. The Cambridge Handbookof the Learning Sciences. Cambridge UniversityPress, New York, pp. 317–334.

Kuhn D, Black J, Keselman A, Kaplan D (2000). Thedevelopment of cognitive skills to supportinquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction 18,495–523.

Liu S, Zhu X (2008). Designing a structured andinteractive learning environment based on GISfor secondary Geography education. Journal ofGeography 107, 12–9.

McClintock R (1992). Power and Pedagogy:Transforming Education through InformationTechnology. Teachers College Press, NewYork.

Mayer RE (2004). Should there be a three-strikesrule against pure discovery learning? AmericanPsychologist 59, 14–9.

Ministry of Education (2007). The New Zealand Cur-riculum. Ministry of Education, Wellington.

Nanjappa A, Grant MM (2003). Constructing on con-structivism: The role of technology. [Cited Mar2010.] Available from URL: http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/nanjappa.htm

National Research Council (2006). Learning to ThinkSpatially. The National Academies Press, Wash-ington, DC.

Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) (2004).2004 Report: ICT in Schools – The Impact ofGovernment Initiatives. Five years on. OFSTED,Manchester.

Palincsar A (1998). Social constructivist perspectiveson teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psy-chology 45, 345–75.

Pawson E, Fournier E, Haigh M, Muniz O, Trafford J,Vajoczki S (2006). Problem-based learning inGeography: Towards a critical assessment of itspurposes, benefits and risks. Journal of Geogra-phy in Higher Education 30, 103–16.

Spencer J, Jordan R (1999). Learner centredapproaches in medical education. BritishMedical Journal 318, 1280–3.

Spronken-Smith R (2005). Implementing a problem-based learning approach for teaching researchmethods in Geography. Journal of Geography inHigher Education 29, 203–21.

Spronken-Smith R, Bullard J, Ray W, Roberts C,Keiffer A (2008). Where might sand dunes be onMars? Engaging students through inquiry-basedlearning in Geography. Journal of Geography inHigher Education 32, 71–86.

Sui DZ (1995). A pedagogic framework to link GISto the intellectual core of Geography. Journal ofGeography 94, 578–91.

Tulloch D, Graff E (2007). Green map exercises as anavenue for problem-based learning in a data-richenvironment. Journal of Geography 106, 267–76.

van der Schee J (2003). New media will accelerate therenewal of geographical education. In: GerberR, ed. International Handbook on GeographicalEducation. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 205–214.

Zohar A (2006). Connected knowledge in scienceand mathematics education. InternationalJournal of Science Education 28, 1579–99.

J. Kinniburgh84


Documents

A constructivist approach to using GIS in the New Zealand classroom