GIS as Science
Sep-21
: In this lesson, we will debate whether GIS is a science and contest how GIS is represented.
Reading
- NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2019. Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. DOI:10.17226/25303
- Chapter 2: Scientific methods and knowledge (pages 21-30 )
- Wright, D. J., M. F. Goodchild, and J. D. Proctor. 1997. GIS: Tool or science? Demystifying the persistent ambiguity of GIS as “tool” versus “science.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 87 (2):346–362. DOI:10.1111/0004-5608.872057
- Focus on Table 1 and pages 353-359 to understand the three positions on GIS as Science (see below)
- St. Martin, K., and J. Wing. 2007. The discourse and discipline of GIS. Cartographica 42 (3):235–248. DOI:10.3138/carto.42.3.235-248
- Focus on pages 239-245 to understand the four themes of GIS Discourse (see below) and their implications for geography and for and teaching GIS
Blog post
The first blog post should be complete prior to today’s class, and may cover any content up to and including today’s readings.
Discussion
- What is science?
- Should GIS be considered a science?
- Is the predominant representation of GIS (St Martin and Wing 2007)
problematic?
- To what extent does Open Source / Open Science contradict or support
the predominant representation of GIS?
In preparation for/response to the debate, please prepare a reflection/position statement in a blog-style post on your GitHub site.
Specifically, you might reflect on:
- Which category of “GIS as Science” most applies to your personal experience thus far using and studying GIS? Do those forms of GIS count as “science”?
Three Positions on GIS as Science (Wright et al 1997)
- GIS is a Scientific Tool
- GIS is Toolmaking for Science
- GIS is a Science
Four themes of GIS Discourse (St. Martin and Wing 2007)
- Singular technology
- Progressing along a linear path
- Inherently expansive and growing
- Universally applicable
Main Page