Chaege To The Committee

The title of the proposal for this report was Support for Thinking Spatially: The Incorporation of Geographic Information Science Across the K-12 Curriculum. Given the need for increased scientific and technological literacy in the workforce and in everyday life, we must equip K-12 graduates with skills that will enable them to think spatially and to take advantage of tools and technologies such as GIS (geographic information systems) (see Box I.3) for supporting spatial thinking.

Therefore, the charge contained two questions, the first of which was intended to generaterecommendations for levels of technology (hardware and software), system supports (e.g., teaching materials), curriculum scope and sequence (e.g., the role of necessary precursors), and preservice and inservice training, while the second was intended to generate recommendations based on an assessment of theoretical and empirical approaches, in psychology and education, relevant to the development of knowledge and skills that underpin the use of GIS.

However, the committee recognized that the charge could not be met without first addressing the educational role of spatial thinking itself. New and better support tools for education such as GIS-may well be necessary and appropriate, but to what purpose and in what contexts? The answer might seem obvious from the proposal title: to support spatial thinking across the K-12 curriculum. However, such a response points to a fundamental question: Why and where do we need to support spatial thinking across the K-12 curriculum? Why should we invest in betterGiS or other support tools? What is the role of spatial thinking in everyday life, the workplace, and science?

After learning to appreciate the fundamental importance of spatial thinking, the committee came to a new understanding of the charge. Questions about the current role and future development of GIS as a support system could be answered satisfactorily only after the societal and therefore educational need for spatial thinking, and the ways in which we learn to think spatially, were understood.

Therefore, the committee developed an understanding of two additional questions: (1) What are the nature and character of spatial thinking? (2) How does the capacity for spatial thinking develop and how might it be fostered systematically by education and training? This revision to the committee charge was approved by the National Research Council (NRC) and met with consent from the project sponsors.

My committee came to believe that spatial thinking is pervasive: it is vital across a wide range of domains of practical and scientific knowledge; yet it is underrecognized, undervalued, underappreciated, and therefore, underinstructed. Despite the practical importance of spatial thinking-historical and contemporary the committee recognized that scientists and educators have not yet clearly identified and described the operations of spatial thinking. Without a clear understanding of the nature and character of spatial thinking, it is impossible to design instructional systems and technologies to support it.