New Options in Online Geospatial Learning: Discover Spatial

There are far more choices for those who want to learn about geospatial technology than ever before. One of the newer options is Discover Spatial, a brand of Australia’s GIS People. I asked Tom Egan, Co-Founder to explain how the platform works and what makes it different from other options.

Ignite Education (IE): What makes Discover Spatial’s offerings different from other online GIS classes, like those at Lynda.com (just acquired by LinkedIn) or those from vendors like Esri?

Tom Egan (TE): As you may already be aware, the geospatial industry has an estimated US$270 billion value worldwide and has been around for 40+ years. So it should come as no surprise that there is a lot of interest in learning about geospatial science and technology. That’s the good news. The bad news is that geospatial training and education is very fragmented at the moment and can be quite expensive. If students want to learn about GIS for example and keep their skills up to date, they will likely have to learn about Esri ArcGIS, Pitney Bowes MapInfo, Google Maps, Hexagon Geospatial, MS SQL Server, Oracle Spatial, FME, CartoDB, etc… So spare a thought for all these students that up until now have had to enrol into courses across many different vendor and eLearning websites.

Enter discoverspatial.com, the world's first and only geospatial eLearning marketplace where students can learn in-demand geospatial skills with easy to follow courses from a wide variety of trainers across the globe. Discover Spatial is a global platform giving students access to a wider range of expert trainers and courses then what they could ever possibly access through a single vendor site or even a university/college degree. Our site is vendor agnostic and designed to be a hub for all geospatial education, giving students all the geospatial learning options in one single, convenient platform. 

From what we’ve researched, existing eLearning portals such as Lynda or Udemy either have very broad focus or provide very limited offering for geospatial training. As such, they are not well placed to provide the best learning experience or compete with the breadth of training options we will ultimately offer. Discover Spatial on the other hand is purpose built to cater specifically for users interested in teaching or learning spatial. 

Spatial Training Works and May Enhance STEM Learning

Northwestern University posted a story about research led by its own Professor David Uttal confirming that training in spatial concepts does indeed raise spatial thinking and reasoning abilities. The meta analysis (a study of studies) reviewed 217 research studies on educational interventions to improve spatial thinking. The upshots:

• Yes, training will improve spatial skills.
• Yes, that improvement will last and transfers to other skills, including perhaps STEM subjects.

Great news! Still aspects of the research, or perhaps just the news story, do give me pause.

Are we talking about training?

The term used throughout the article to describe the intervention is training. Maybe I don't know its proper meaning in this context. I do know we do not do training in GIS at at Penn State. We don't even teach software (something I would describe as training). 

Do we train K-12 students? Do we train them to read? To do fractions? Perhaps we do.

The few examples of the spatial training offered in the article include physics students using 3D representations (not physical models only, I guess) and the use of video games. The good news here is that more than one type of intervention can work. But is it really training?

What interventions work "best"?

I'm sure this is already being researched or planned for the future, but which of the various interventions show the most return? Do different ones work better at different ages? For different types of learners? For different genders? Will adults get as much out of spatial puzzles as five year old Max and Theo do at school?

How do we use these results?

With the current focus on STEM education and the never-say-die efforts to promote geography in he U.S., who will take the lead on translating this research into action or policy? Whose job is that? Do the findings necessarily make geography and GIS key tools in advancement of spatial skills?