jiechen wang, haochen ni, yikang rui, can cui and liang cheng · spatial information. to overcome...

A WebGIS-based teaching assistant system for geography fieldpractice (TASGFP)

Jiechen Wang, Haochen Ni, Yikang Rui, Can Cui and Liang Cheng

Jiechen Wang is a professor at Nanjing University. Haochen Ni is a master student at Nanjing University. Yikang Ruiis a postdoctoral fellow at Nanjing University. Can Cui is a Ph.D student at Utrecht University. Liang Cheng is anassociate professor at Nanjing University. Address for correspondence: Dr Jiechen Wang, Jiangsu Provincial KeyLaboratory of Geographic Information Science and Technology, Nanjing University, Xianlin Avenue 163, Nanjing210023, China. Email: [email protected]

AbstractField practice is an important part of training geography research talents. However,traditional teaching methods may not adequately manage, share and implementinstruction resources and thus may limit the instructor’s ability to conduct field instruc-tion. A possible answer is found in the rapid development of computer-assisted instruc-tion (CAI), a new teaching mode for the Information Age. A “virtual field trip” is anamalgam of Internet and multimedia techniques with great potential for geography fieldinstruction, as it can arouse students’ enthusiasm and immerse them in learning.However, limited by available technology, virtual field trips have disadvantages in termsof content presentation, data organisation, and loss or inadequate representation ofspatial information. To overcome the above shortcomings, a map-based, spatially corre-lated design method was proposed for a CAI system in geography. By integrating spatialinformation technology (Geographic Information System, Global Positioning System,remote sensing, etc) and information delivery methods (web services, databases, etc), aWebGIS-based teaching assistant system for geography field practice (TASGFP) wasestablished, realising an effective spatial management scheme and forming a sharedplatform for instruction material. Its efficiency was verified through the actual applica-tion, although there remains room for improvement. Nevertheless, the TASGFP standsas an effective CAI tool in geography instruction.

IntroductionField practice, as the name implies, is a study process where supervised learning can take place viafirst-hand experience outside the four walls of the classroom setting (Lonergan & Andresen,1988). Geography education in general and field learning in particular are a critical componentof geoscience education in each learning phase, from primary education to higher education(Downs, Liben & Daggs, 1988; Fuller, Edmondson, France, Higgitt & Ratinen, 2006; Haigh &Gold, 1993). Geography field practice is a distinctive and intriguing learning process, which offersstudents an opportunity to observe natural and geographic phenomena in a close way (Kent,Gilbertson & Hunt, 1997). By engagement in field practice, students can familiarise themselveswith basic concepts, theory and research methods, and cultivate the practical ability to scrutinise,analyse and solve problems independently. Thus, geography field practice is a critical link betweentheory and reality (Healey, 2005). The differences between geography field practice and intern-ship style instruction in other disciplines include its open learning environment (easily affectedby external changes such as natural disasters or other emergencies and lacking effective instruc-

British Journal of Educational Technology (2014)doi:10.1111/bjet.12231

© 2014 British Educational Research Association

tion methods), high cost of trips (transportation, accommodation and equipment) and pooreducational practices (on the part of both inexperienced teachers and students) (Haigh & Gold,1993). Meanwhile, the teaching content of geography varies in complexity from physical tosocial subfields and the teaching objects vary from abstract to concrete; and limited by theircognitive ability as young people and the traditional instruction method, it is difficult for studentsto comprehend the mechanisms behind geographical phenomena by means of classroom instruc-tion only (Downs & Liben, 1991).

Aiming to promote the effectiveness of geography fieldwork, scholars have begun to apply newinstructional techniques in geoscience learning; one of these is computer-assisted instruction(CAI) (Kulik & Kulik, 1991). CAI was first used in geography instruction in the 1960s (Fielding,1968); since then, it has become much easier to use and has been applied with almost everyteaching method and in most subject areas of geography in higher education (Shepherd, 1985),including geography field learning. The advent of the Internet and new multimedia techniquesgave birth to the virtual field trip, a novel mode of CAI for field instruction. Virtual field trips give

Practitioner NotesWhat is already known about this topic

• Geography education in general and field learning in particular is a critical componentof geoscience education (Downs, Liben & Daggs, 1988, Haigh & Gold, 1993, Fuller,Edmondson, France, Higgitt & Ratinen, 2006).

• Scholars have applied computer assistant instruction (CAI) in geoscience learning formany years, for example the virtual field trips (Kulik and Kulik, 1991).

• Because of technological limits, virtual field trips in the early stage were poor in termsof presentation and organisation of information (Foley, 2001).

What this paper adds

• Spatial information technologies such as geographic information system (GIS), globalpositioning system (GPS), and remote sensing (RS) was integrated with novel infor-mation storage and organization technologies such as relational databases and webservices into a geography fieldwork CAI system.

• A spatially correlated design method was devised aiming to achieve more convenient,systematic, and useful support for CAI in geography field instruction. The maincontent of this method is taking map data as the principal element and spatially correlatedteaching resource management.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• Provide a new design idea and implement mode for CAI system for geography fieldinstruction.

• GIS, Web service, and spatial database are adopted to correlate common media withspatial data, represent all of these data on the map and manage them in the samedatabase.

• Spatially correlated links are applied to replace traditional hyperlink. It makes instruc-tion materials surrounded by relevant geographic information and helps studentscomprehend the complicated geographic phenomena.

• The TASGFP’s cross-platform mode makes the system widely deployable across insti-tutions and users, and hence, usable as a platform for sharing teaching resources onpractice bases.

2 British Journal of Educational Technology


students and teachers safer and more convenient access to field learning at a relatively low cost,allowing more and more geography students to enjoy the amazing experience of nature and othercultures. However, because of technological limits, virtual field trips in the early stage were poorin terms of presentation and organisation of information (Foley, 2001). Instruction materialssuch as pictures or texts were generally stored in file directories and organised by hyperlinked; thisis an inefficient data access method that ignores spatial relationships among the information anda poor organised mode that lacks spatial operations, such as precise spatial localisation or rapidspatial retrieval. These bottlenecks hinder the further development of CAI in geography fieldwork.

To break through the bottleneck, spatial information technologies such as Geographic Informa-tion System (GIS), Global Positioning System (GPS) and remote sensing (RS) were integrated withnovel information storage and organisation technologies such as relational databases and webservices into a geography fieldwork CAI system. Finally, based on consideration of the character-istics of geography fieldwork and of the potential of new techniques for field instruction, ateaching assistant system for geography field practice (TASGFP) was established with the LushanPractice Base (Lushan Mountain, Jiangxi Province, China) as an experimental site. The systemimplemented a spatially correlated design method aiming to achieve more convenient, systematicand useful support for CAI in geography field instruction.

Geographic fieldwork and cognitive development of college studentsGeoscience and geography fieldworkGeoscience is the study of the composition, structure and physical dynamics of the Earth(Gonzales, Keane & Martinez, 2009). Geography fieldwork can provide geographers with first-hand experience observing and measuring the Earth’s structures and processes in their naturalcontext.

Like other scientific activities, fieldwork involves both observation and interpretation.The essentialdifference of field science from laboratory or theoretical science is that in the former, observationand interpretation take place in a more expansive, complicated and fluid arena. Geographyfieldwork can be divided in general into three main components: data acquisition through directobservation and measurement, organising the data into representations such as maps and diagramsto generalise and interpret findings and constructing histories and proposing operational mechanismsfor structures and processes to explain observation data and predict the future situation (Compton,1985).

Geographic field practice instructionIn primary and secondary education, geographic field practice instruction (“outdoor activities”)can raise learning interest and achievement and provide students freer access to geoscience (Lai,1999; Nundy, 1999). In higher education, in contrast, geographic instruction contexts becomemore systemic, professionally oriented and abstract, and so, concrete fieldwork and the concreteperspective it provides become an essential component of geoscience education and the core ofgeography (Jenkins et al, 1991). In developed countries such as the UK, well-planned field learn-ing dates back to the 19th century (Ploszajska, 1998); it is now also a very common method inthe USA (May, 1999). Meanwhile, in developing countries such as China, hampered by fundingshortages and poor infrastructure, the importance of fieldwork has just recently becomeacknowledged (Egunjobi, 2009; Li, Kong & Peng, 2007). Regardless, geography field practice iskey to training research talents specialising in geography and to the development of the geo-graphic sciences (Scott, Fuller & Gaskin, 2006).

Geoscience literacy and cognitive developmentGeographic field practice is key to geography research and instruction. Then, what is the pivotalfactor for transfer of geoscience knowledge in the field? From the perspective of cognitive develop-

Geography field practice teaching assistant system 3


ment theory, the effectiveness of geographic field instruction depends upon learners’ geoscienceliteracy and cognitive developmental level, and geographic education and cognitive developmentare intertwined during instruction (Downs & Liben, 1991). Hence, geographic instruction shouldreflect students’ geographic understanding as well as their cognitive, psychological and socialdevelopment.

The fundamental factor influencing geographic instruction is the student’s prior knowledgeabout the geographic phenomenon, that is, his or her geoscience literacy—as defined by the EarthScience Literacy Initiative (2010), is a set of basic ideas and skills that characterise an Earthscience literate person. A geoscience-literate person will have a fundamental understanding ofhow scientific research is conducted and will be able to actively construct scientific knowledgerather than simply assimilating a canonical body of knowledge (Bransford & Donovan, 2005).Another influential factor is the learner’s cognitive developmental level, referring to the cognitivestructures providing the fundamental intellectual prerequisites for understanding any domainof knowledge (Granshaw, 2011). Students can use these general cognitive skills to understandgeographic concepts.

Critical thinking in geographic field instructionCritical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully conceptualising,applying, analysing, synthesising and evaluating information gathered from or generated byobservation, experience, reflection, reasoning or communication, as a guide to belief and action(Scriven & Paul, 1987a, 1987b). Critical thinking is generally associated with the higher levelsof cognition—analysing, synthesising and evaluating—in ascending order of precedence andmaturity (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill & Krathwohl, 1956). Therefore, cultivating critical think-ing is an important part of cognitive development.

Critical thinking enables students to analyse, evaluate, explain and restructure their thinking,meanwhile decreasing the risk of adopting, acting on or thinking with a false belief. To promotecritical thinking, students should increase their understanding of scientific theories throughindividual exploration of concepts and debate employing these concepts, not just rote learning(Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000). Teachers should help students form their own conceptions, forexample, through direct experience of field practice, putting geography instruction in the contextof the real geographical environment (Nairn, 2005). Because of the unconstrained nature offield situations, fieldwork requires investigators to contend with incomplete data and solve prob-lems with multiple solutions. Consequently, field experience is a rich venue for teaching studentsstrategies for dealing with uncertainty in problem solving.

In summary, the goal of instruction is to foster expertise in a discipline. This requires well-designedcurriculum pedagogy matched to students’ cognitive abilities and current understanding.

CAI in geographic field practice instructionThe constraint factor in geography field practiceGeographic field practice instruction differs from traditional classroom instruction in terms ofteaching environment, content and resources, complexities that can decrease the effectiveness offield practice (Kent et al, 1997; Lonergan & Andresen, 1988). Geography field practice furnishesstudents with a platform to conduct teaching and learning processes in close contact with nature;however, it also poses procedural difficulties due to the features of specific teaching environments(Haigh & Gold, 1993). Ordinary instruction is done in a fixed location, the classroom, whilefield practice takes place in a variety of “open” locations and environments whose features may beunpredictable (Lonergan & Andresen, 1988). Teaching in field practice thus needs to considerfeatures of locales, teachers and students and the possible interference from externalities such asweather and noise. (Fuller, Gaskin & Scott, 2003). Thus, open instruction poses a challenge bothto teachers and to students (Dolmans & Schmidt, 1996).



Knowledge conveyed in the classroom is mainly abstract, while the content of field practice isconcrete and real; thus, there is a huge gap between them (Kent et al, 1997). Other obstacles toeffective field practice include lack of useful preparation time and lack of instruction time (Haigh& Gold, 1993).

Similarly, the range of teaching resources in use is diverse and complex, and many of themare difficult to use in the field (Dunn, 1992). Because teaching in the field largely constitutes oralinstruction, it is not generally easy to develop or implement field teaching resources or materials.In addition, although many institutions may choose the same sites for field learning (the onesperceived as most promising), there is no convenient platform for them to share teaching andlearning resources, and the rate of sharing is low.

Finally, geographic field practice also challenges teachers involved in class preparation, as, forexample, they cannot employ blackboards or slides. Traditional instruction thus has difficultiesmeeting the needs of geographic fieldwork in several ways, and new technology should be utilisedto achieve teaching goals in the field (Nellis, 1994; Shepherd, 1985).

CAI and virtual field tripsStarting in the 1960s, it has been proved that CAI can indeed enhance instructional efficiency andeffectiveness (Atkinson, 1968; Kulik & Kulik, 1991). Furthermore, in the last 20 years, the rapidproliferation of computer technologies such as virtual reality, network technologies, multimediatechnologies and system-integrated technologies has reinvigorated CAI (Armstrong & Bennett,2005; Dykes, Moore & Wood, 1999; van Joolingen, de Jong, Lazonder, Savelsbergh & Manlove,2005), and has enabled the virtual field trip, a new application of CAI in geographic field practice.A virtual field trip is a simulated, real-time field trip or guided exploration consisting of aninterrelated collection of images, texts, videos or other information media covering a specifictheme, delivered to the public via web browser (Dykes et al, 1999). The first virtual field tripprogram, LEARNZ, appeared in 1995 and became very popular by the 21st century (Stainfield,Fisher, Ford & Solem, 2000). Nowadays, there are different formats of virtual field trips. Some justconsist of a list of links, while others allow navigation throughout the field trip. In our opinion, thebest virtual field trip implementation should consist of interactive pages on the Web, selected byeducators and arranged such that they can be explored in either a linear or a non-linear fashion.Virtual field trips are cost-effective for schools, as they eliminate the costs of renting transportation,insurance coverage and chaperones. Because of their simplicity to operate and lively presentation,they are suitable for elementary school students as well as older students.

In traditional virtual field trips, materials such as pictures or texts were presented as hyperlinksand stored in file directories, an inefficient data access method that furthermore ignores spatialaspects, such as spatial position and spatial relationship. Thus, there is room to apply spatialinformation technology to extend the functions of virtual field trips.

Spatial information technologySpatial information technologies include GIS, GPS, RS and spatial data management (Brodnig &Mayer-Schonberger, 2000). GIS integrates functions to capture, store, manipulate, analyse,manage and present geographical data (Audet & Abegg, 1996). GPS offers high-accuracy 3Dcoordinates for an object, and RS gives an immersive and realistic experience of an environmentthat is much better than a traditional 2D map.

Besides the new possibilities provided by spatial information technology, progress in informationhandling, for example, databases and web services, also makes the implementation of a moreefficient and stable application system possible. The database provides a unified managementmode for a large amount of data, and web services offer a distribution presentation platform formulti-users through the Internet.



Geography field practice in higher education in China and the Lushan Practice BaseModes of geography teaching in Chinese higher educationIn China, many comprehensive universities, such as Peking University and Nanjing University(NJU), already had geography departments by the early 20th century. These universities havetraditionally had abundant human and material resources to support instruction in geographicfield practice and have usually organised annual field trips for undergraduate geography majors,a practice also followed by other universities (Li et al, 2007). In these universities, the coreundergraduate geography curriculum covers both physical and human geography, includingsubfields such as geology, physiognomy, hydrology, climate, vegetation, soil, tourism, environ-ment, transportation, planning and so on (Fazhan & Zhihua, 2007). With recent developmentsin spatial information technology, courses on GIS, RS, GPS and other new technologies have alsobeen incorporated into core curricula to give students a wide perspective on geography as ascience. After initial theoretical instruction, students go on an integrated geography field trip in aselected area. Through this field trip, they get a better understanding of basic field knowledge andform their own opinions about the relations between theory and reality or theory and practice.

Lushan Practice BaseField practice usually relies on a practice base, generally a natural region representative of itstype. Lushan Mountain and its surroundings have these traits in exemplary form (Jiu Miao, ZongYing, Fu Cheng & Ye Gen, 2000).

Bordering the Yangtze River in the north and Poyang Lake in the east and northeast, the Lushanregion exhibits diverse geology and physiognomy—the renowned mountainous area, piedmonthills and a waterfront plain, as shown in Figure 1. Seated in a transitional zone between thecentral and north semi-tropics, the ecosystems of Lushan are typical and diverse, with conspicu-ous vertical differentiation of natural elements. Lushan has been designated a “world culturallandscape” and a “world geological park” by United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization and its research value for human geography and physical geography has beenrecognised worldwide. Figure 2 shows some natural and cultural landscapes and scenic spots inLushan. Convenient transportation infrastructure is another advantage of Lushan Practice Base.

Many Chinese higher education institutions have long-established field practice bases in Lushan.Their field practice may cover many domains, such as geology, physiognomy, hydrology, meteor-ology, vegetation, soil, ecological environment and human geography. Fieldwork is usuallydivided into two stages—an outdoor investigation stage and an indoor stage of sorting fieldrecords. In general, in Lushan, the outdoor stage covers almost the whole area (Figure 3 shows

Figure 1: Location of the study area



the distribution of practice locations and routes). During the indoor stage, students concentrateon analysing samples, sorting photos and pictures, and finally preparing a summarising practicereport. This may be done anywhere.

TASGFPBased on a systemic analysis of the characteristics of geographic fieldwork and successful CAIapplications in geography education (Brunner-Friedrich, Lechthaler & Simonne-Dombovari,2011; Jacobson, Militello & Baveye, 2009), a WebGIS-based TASGFP was established with thesupport of network technology and spatial information technology. This system provides a moreeffective approach to storage and sharing of teaching resources to facilitate students’ access tomaterials and their learning.

Design blueprint of the TASGFPThe main design characteristics of this TASGFP are as follows:

1. Taking map data as the principal element

As field practice is an outdoor activity, the efficiency of instruction relies on the spatial features ofpractice locales, and maps are the historic medium of spatial information (Laurini & Thompson,1992). Map data are the principal element of the TASGFP.

As shown in Figure 4, the main interface is laid out using digital spatial information on Lushan’sterrain, transportation networks, hydrological conditions, field instruction material and so on.To manage these map data, a layer control module presents each map layer according to user

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 2: Some selected pictures. (a) Poyang Lake and Sand Mountain; (b) Guling Town; (c) Sandie Waterfalls;(d) Global Geopark



requirements. For convenient operation, the system’s other functions are also constituted asfunction icons at the bottom of the interface: basic map operation, object identifying, GPS loca-tion and JPEG exportation. Thus, the system’s internal details are kept unobtrusive so users canconcentrate on their own tasks.

2. Spatially correlated teaching resource management

All instruction materials are associated with high-precision real-time coordinates on the map,secured using mobile GPS. A spatially correlated teaching resource management method wasdesigned to manage the spatial correlation of these materials: first, a practice locale is located onthe map by its coordinates, and then video, picture and audio teaching resources concerningrelated geographic phenomena are linked to the locale as a central hub (see Figure 5).

Guided by this concept, the Practice Points module is the nucleus of the TASGFP. It manages thespatial positions of practice locales and related content by arranging locale names in tabular form

Figure 3: Distribution of practice locations and routes



Figure 4: System main interface

Figure 5: Principal design concept of the teaching assistant system for geography field practice (TASGFP)



and displaying them at the proper map coordinates when they are selected. At the same time,knowledge points related to the locale are shown. For instance, as shown in Figure 6, the practicelocale Huanglong Temple involves four knowledge points, respectively related to climate, humani-ties, soil and vegetation. Teaching resources of various types are then connected to these knowl-edge points. Figure 7 shows a picture viewer that presents photos taken in practice localesusing the Video Scanning module; similarly, the media players play video and audio resourcesderived from field practice. This is expected to be a more compelling approach than traditionalhyperlinking. Last, a Practice Route module allows practice locale management, realising con-version from practice locale to practice route as needed.

In terms of instruction material in special topic, the Scenery Sites module and the Theme Knowl-edge module are added into the system. These modules integrate renowned scenic spots andspecial material (such as Lushan’s characteristic villa group) into the system and present multi-media materials on them. These enrich system content and facilitate students about LushanPractice Base. Overall, these modules integrate discrete teaching content and allow unified man-agement of it.

In addition, the TASGFP also provides a special function called roaming, based on the concept of a“street view map.” Along the practice route, continuous video is recorded in a walking or drivingmode with exact coordinates from GPS. Figure 8 shows video of roaming scenes from a drivingperspective. The actual conditions on both sides of the street are presented. The yellow car iconindicates the path along which the car moves; when the car reaches a given position, the videowindow presents information specific to that position.

Using these management functions, not only can the general geographic environments of prac-tice locales be learned through the maps, but practice content can also be stored and managed.The grouping of different locales and their associated practice points into a practice route is aconvenient and effective arrangement. Because the design of the practice locales determines the

Figure 6: Practice site information management



Figure 7: Practice picture query

Figure 8: Virtual scene navigation



success or failure of field practice as a whole, we group practice points according to their rel-evance and get the distance between each practice locales. This allows better planned and moreefficient field trips.

The implementation techniques of the TASGFPTo realise this design, we needed to adopt a system that handles spatial data well. GIS was selectedto achieve our goal. It integrates functions of acquisition, storage, manipulation, analysis, man-agement and presentation for geographical data (Audet & Abegg, 1996). Meanwhile, for betteraccessibility and operability, the TASGFP was designed as a cross-platform interactive systembased on a network model. WebGIS is a GIS system designed for the network environment to meetthese demands (Dragicevic & Balram, 2004).

TASGFP data are complex and diverse in type, format and storage mode, and the design conceptof the TASGFP is that it should be able to relate all of these data to the practice locale. To do so, arelational database is combined with a spatial data engine, ArcSDE, to store and manage spatialas well as ordinary data (Rui, Huang & Chang, 1999).

As the TASGFP is designed for both students and teachers across various institutions, it is neces-sary to be able to set different degrees of access. The system administrator has authority toperform any operation related to the system and database, such as revising system functions orarchitecture and data manipulation; teachers in different institutions can do data entry, whilestudents can only browse and query.

The establishment of the TASGFPThe establishment of the TASGFP comprised three main phases: material collection, system imple-mentation and system deployment.

The first phase was conducted mainly in 2010. A requirements survey was conducted before fieldpractice, determining what kind of instruction materials should be used. A whole class and theirguider from the School of Geographic and Oceanographic Science (SGOS) of NJU were selectedas respondents. First, we asked them some questions about their experiences and preparations fora class field trip to Lushan. Then, their whole field trip was tracked by recording photo, video,audio and coordinate information during instruction and activities. In all, we collected 55 audiorecords, 644 photo records, and 45 video records, for a total of 4.08 GB of information. Thesecond phase, architecture design and module coding, was conducted mainly in 2011. On thebasis of the information collected in the first phase, a database was built on the data server andbasic map data were prepared on the GIS server. Then, function modules were established toenable data operations in the data server, spatial operations in the GIS server and presentationfunctions in the web server. Finally, the TASGFP was deployed on the NJU intranet in 2012,accessible to staff and students across campus. To ascertain its reception, a survey was carried outamong SGOS students who would attend Lushan field practice in fall 2013. The number ofsubject is 109. The majority of these students (80.7%) thought the TASGFP was an interestingand fruitful way to get basic information before the field trip, but could not replace the practiceguidebook, which was more systematic and comprehensive.

DiscussionThe key characteristic of TASGFP is the Taking Map Data as the Principal Element and SpatiallyCorrelated Teaching Resource Management. To realise this characteristic, GIS (the main mapservice), web service and spatial database are adopted to correlate common media such video,picture and audio with spatial data from GPS and RS, represent all of these data on themap and manage them in the same database. On the web client, spatially correlated linksare applied to replace traditional hyperlink. It makes instruction materials surrounded by rel-evant geographic information and helps students comprehend the complicated geographicphenomena.



The TASGFP’s cross-platform mode makes the system widely deployable across institutionsand users, and hence, usable as a platform for sharing teaching resources on practice bases.The TASGFP also unified architecture that can refer easily to other applications. Thus, thesystem can be applied to other practice bases simply by modifying map data and instructiondata.

Although new design ideas applied in the TASGFP have overcome the drawbacks that recent fieldinstruction CAI has faced in terms of presentation and organisation of spatial information,further improvements can still improve the system.

First, the spatial attributes of instruction have not been fully exploited nor has the power of spatialinformation technology. At present, instruction materials are organised and managed to corre-late with spatial attributes; in the next step, spatial statistics and analysis (spatial buffers, overlays,map algebra, etc) will be integrated into our system to explore the spatial information intrinsic tothe instruction materials.

Second, the method for instruction materials is mainly traditional (picture, video, audio). The onlynew method is roaming, which combines video and spatial information based on the concept of a“street view map.” As traditional media is poor to represent spatial information (Carr, 2002), newpresentation method, such as virtual reality (Huang, Jiang & Li, 2001), should be added into oursystem.

Third, another potential problem for the TASGFP is setting common standards for instructionmaterials. As the TASGFP will be accessible to different institutions, each staff member withdatabase management authority across these institutions can upload their own materials toshare with others. It will be a challenge to set up a unified standard for efficacious managementof these different materials. At present, the TASGFP has only been deployed at NJU; thus, itseffectiveness as an information-sharing platform has not been fully tested nor have technicalissues such as data standards. The next stage in our research is to deploy the TASGFP at multipleinstitutions to validate its wider effectiveness and to constantly improve the system to meet thereal needs of geography field practice instruction.

ConclusionThis paper examined the characteristics and methods of geography field practice, taking inte-grated geography field practices in the Lushan Mountain region of China as a case site, proposeda map-based, spatially correlated design method for CAI systems in geography and establisheda WebGIS-based TASGFP. Spatial information, databases and web server technologies wereemployed to realise this shared spatial management platform for field practice instructionmaterial. The TASGFP is just a prototype system, but there is no doubt that it can do great serviceto geography instruction; nevertheless, much more effort should be spent to more fully validatethe TASGFP and exploit the potential of CAI in field practice.

AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grantno.41371017) and the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University (NCET-13-0280), the Project Funded by the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu HigherEducation Institutions, and the Natural Science Innovative Talents Cultivation Base, the Geo-graphic and Oceanographic Science Teaching Demonstration Laboratory of Jiangsu Province.We would like to thank the whole staff and student body of the School of Geographic andOceanographic Science for providing instruction materials and participating in the system test.

ReferencesArmstrong, M. P. & Bennett, D. A. (2005). A manifesto on mobile computing in geographic education.

The Professional Geographer, 57, 4, 506–515.



Atkinson, R. C. (1968). Computerized instruction and the learning process. The American Psychologist, 23,4, 225–239.

Audet, R. H. & Abegg, G. L. (1996). Geographic information systems: implications for problem solving.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1, 21–45.

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H. & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educationalobjectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: cognitive domain. Philadelphia, PA: David McKayCompany. Inc.

Bransford, J. D. & Donovan, M. S. (2005). Scientific inquiry and how people learn. In M. S. Donovan, & J. D.Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: history, mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 397–420).Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Brodnig, G. & Mayer-Schonberger, V. (2000). Bridging the gap: the role of spatial information technologiesin the integration of traditional environmental knowledge and western science. The Electronic Journal ofInformation Systems in Developing Countries, 1, 1, 1–15.

Brunner-Friedrich, B., Lechthaler, M. & Simonne-Dombovari, E. (2011). User-adapted Interactive andMultimedia-based Cartographic Information Systems (IMAIS) as tools for geographic education.Mitteilungen Der Osterreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft, 153, 273–290.

Carr, J. R. (2002). Data visualization in the geosciences. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Compton, R. R. (1985). Geology in the field. New York: John Wiles and Sons.Dolmans, D. & Schmidt, H. (1996). The advantages of problem-based curricula. Postgraduate Medical Journal,

72, 851, 535–538.Downs, R. M. & Liben, L. S. (1991). The development of expertise in geography: a cognitive-development

approach to geographic education. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 81, 2, 304–327.Downs, R. M., Liben, L. S. & Daggs, D. G. (1988). On education and geographers: the role of cognitive

developmental theory in geographic education. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 78, 4,680–700.

Dragicevic, S. & Balram, S. (2004). A Web GIS collaborative framework to structure and manage distributedplanning processes. Journal of Geographical Systems, 6, 2, 133–153.

Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in class-rooms. Science Education, 84, 3, 287–312.

Dunn, J. M. (1992). Translation and development theory in geography education: a model for the genesisand production of geography instructional materials in a competitive funded grant environment. Journalof Geography, 91, 3, 97–105.

Dykes, J., Moore, K. & Wood, J. (1999). Virtual environments for student fieldwork using networked com-ponents. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 13, 4, 397–416.

Earth Science Literacy Initiative (2010). Earth science literacy principles: the big ideas and supportingconcepts of Earth science. Arlington, VA, U.S.A.: National Science Foundation.

Egunjobi, A. O. (2009). Efficacy of three computer-assisted instructional modes on students’ academicperformance in secondary school practical geography in Nigeria. Proceedings of the 4th InternationalConference on E-Learning: University of Toronto, Canada, 16–17 July 2009 (pp. 101–108). AcademicConferences Limited.

Fazhan, Y. & Zhihua, Z. (2007). The evaluation on teaching mode and teaching effect in the teaching ofphysical geography filed exercitation in Lushan area. Journal of Science of Teachers’ College and University,27, 2, 102–106.

Fielding, G. J. (1968). Computer-assisted instruction in geography. Journal of Geography, 67, 8, 474–483.Foley, K. (2001). The big pocket guide to using and creating virtual field trips. Cambridge, MA: Persistent VISION.Fuller, I., Gaskin, S. & Scott, I. (2003). Student perceptions of geography and environmental science field-

work in the light of restricted access to the field, caused by Foot and Mouth Disease in the UK in 2001.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27, 1, 79–102.

Fuller, I., Edmondson, S., France, D., Higgitt, D. & Ratinen, I. (2006). International perspectives on theeffectiveness of geography fieldwork for learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30, 1, 89–101.

Gonzales, L., Keane, C. & Martinez, C. (2009). Status of geoscience workforce 2009. Alexandria, VA: AmericanGeological Institute.

Granshaw, F. D. (2011). Designing and using virtual field environments to enhance and extend field experience inprofessional development programs in geology for K-12 teachers. Portland, OR: Portland State University.

Haigh, M. & Gold, J. R. (1993). The problems with fieldwork: a group-based approach towards integratingfieldwork into the undergraduate geography curriculum. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 17, 1,21–32.

Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in HigherEducation, 29, 2, 183–201.



Huang, B., Jiang, B. & Li, H. (2001). An integration of GIS, virtual reality and the Internet for visualization,analysis and exploration of spatial data. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15, 5,439–456.

Jacobson, A. R., Militello, R. & Baveye, P. C. (2009). Development of computer-assisted virtual field trips tosupport multidisciplinary learning. Computers and Education, 52, 3, 571–580.

Jenkins, A., Lee, R., Monk, J., Rikey, J., Shepherd, I. & Unwin, D. (1991). Teaching Geography in HigherEducation: a manual of good practice. Oxford: Blackwell.

Jiu Miao, C., Zong Ying, W., Fu Cheng, L. & Ye Gen, S. (2000). A Preliminary study on reformation of thecurrent model and content of physical geography field practice in Lushan area. Journal of Anhui NormalUniversity (Natural Science), 23, 4, 383–385.

van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Savelsbergh, E. R. & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: researchand development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning.Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 4, 671–688.

Kent, M., Gilbertson, D. D. & Hunt, C. O. (1997). Fieldwork in geography teaching: a critical review of theliterature and approaches. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21, 3, 313–332.

Kulik, C. L. C. & Kulik, J. A. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: an updated analysis.Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 1, 75–94.

Lai, K. C. (1999). Freedom to learn: a study of the experiences of secondary school teachers and students ina geography field trip. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 8, 3, 239–255.

Laurini, R. & Thompson, D. (1992). Fundamentals of spatial information systems. Waltham, MA: AcademicPress.

Li, X. J., Kong, Y. F. & Peng, B. Y. (2007). Development of geography in higher education in China since 1980.Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 31, 1, 19–37.

Lonergan, N. & Andresen, L. W. (1988). Field-based education: some theoretical considerations. HigherEducation Research and Development, 7, 1, 63–77.

May, J. (1999). Developing fieldwork in social and cultural geography: illustrations from a residential fieldclass in Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 23, 2, 207–225.

Nairn, K. (2005). The problems of utilizing “direct experience” in geography education. Journal of Geographyin Higher Education, 29, 2, 293–309.

Nellis, M. D. (1994). Technology in geographic education: reflections and future-directions. Journal ofGeography, 93, 1, 36–39.

Nundy, S. (1999). The fieldwork effect: the role and impact of fieldwork in the upper primary school.International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 8, 2, 190–198.

Ploszajska, T. (1998). Down to earth? Geography fieldwork in English schools, 1870–1944. Environment andPlanning. D, Society and Space, 16, 757–774.

Rui, Y., Huang, T. S. & Chang, S. (1999). Image retrieval: current techniques, promising directions, and openissues. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 10, 1, 39–62.

Scott, I., Fuller, I. & Gaskin, S. (2006). Life without fieldwork: some lecturers’ perceptions of geography andenvironmental science fieldwork. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30, 1, 161–171.

Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1987a). Critical thinking as defined by the National Council for Excellence in CriticalThinking. Tomales, CA: The Critical Thinking Community.

Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1987b). Critical thinking as defined by the National Council for Excellence in CriticalThinking. Statement presented at: 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking andEducation Reform, August 1987, Rohnert Park, CA.

Shepherd, I. (1985). Teaching geography with the computer: possibilities and problems. Journal of Geographyin Higher Education, 9, 1, 3–21.

Stainfield, J., Fisher, P., Ford, B. & Solem, M. (2000). International virtual field trips: a new direction? Journalof Geography in Higher Education, 24, 2, 255–262.



jiechen wang, haochen ni, yikang rui, can cui and liang cheng · spatial information. to overcome...

Documents