Tuesday, August 21. 2007

URISA: Body of Knowledge

A session titled "The GIS Professional Body of Knowledge: What You Need to Know" turned out to be unexpectedly provocative. Al Butler's presentation on a survey of GISPs done by GISCI suggests that many GISPs by their own admission are not fully competent in the 10 areas of knowledge in the first verison of the UCGIS Body of Knowledge (BoK). Now, the stats might be a bit dodgy since the terminology in that document (it's outline) may not mesh with the terms used "in the field." The area about which respondents had the least compentence: raster data (nearly 30% didn't feel competent). At the other end of the spectrum only 11% didn't feel up to snuff on aggregation and related topics. Respondents also felt that two topics that were not identified as core in the BoK, public speaking and programming, should be added. Respondents felt strongly about using the BoK for certification and 85% supported the idea of an exam. The main complaint however, is that the BoK is too academic.

What comes out of these data? It may indicate where continuing ed for GISP might be focussed, perhaps by URISA, which I understand is looking into giving online courses. It also prompted attendees to ponder a certification with both portfolio and test components. Finally, it was suggested we consider a process comparable to engineers: a test right after school (EIT) and then one after some years of work experience (PE). Asked on attendee: So, have we been certifying individuals without broad knowledge? That is, techs? Al Butler said yes, and noted GISP certification is new and it may be time to begin "tweaking it." This study is certainly a step in that direction. GISCI's Scott Grams promised to get the presentation and the data up on the GISCI website soon.

While that presentation got the most buzz, the other two presentations in the session were also valuable. David Dibiase, representing UCGIS, highlighted the process behind and value of the BoK and the plans for version 2 (and asked for participants). Trish Maggio-Long of Trenton highlighted the successes and failures of trying to do GIS training on a budget. Tutorials to be done by staff didn't work. Hands-on training turned into demonstrations when Internet connections were slow and applications were too general for the types of information sought. Desktop hands-on training was better but highlighted limitations in the city's data sets (timeliness, mostly). She noted with no budget and no mandate from above there are 5 people regularly using GIS in the city, among the 270 city workers at city hall. The discussion of her efforts brought up a new term for many in the audience: Value on Investment. It's different from return on investment as it takes into account non-tangible returns.

[Disclosure: URISA covered my lodging for this event.]

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

No comments

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to	[ Top level ]
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information?   Subscribe to this entry