Analysis of Quantitative Profiles of GI Education: towards an Analytical Basis for EduMapping

  • Frans RipEmail author
  • Elias Grinias
  • Dimitris Kotzinos
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC, volume 1)


There is an ongoing discussion among the members of the GI educational community about the possibility to find a common way to describe a course taught as part of a GI curriculum (anywhere in the world) with the final goal of being able to automatically identify similar courses and define their equivalence. EduMapping is such an initiative that started recently, which used the BoK concepts as its basic labeling scheme. Based on this work we extended the analysis provided by the EduMapping initiative by suggesting and applying an analytical method that is capable of clustering the courses into classes based on (dis)similarity metrics, which are in turn calculated based on the course assessments done by their instructors using the BoK concepts. In this paper, we present and discuss the preliminary results obtained while applying the suggested method on the EduMapping data. We also provide some pointers for further research in an area that has very few contributions so far.


Teaching Content Teaching Time Knowledge Area Average Silhouette Quantitative Profile 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. DiBiase, D., M. deMers, et al., Eds. (2006). Geographic Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge. Washington, D.C., Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
  2. Kaufman L., Rousseeuw, P.J. (1990). Finding groups in data. New York, Wiley. Masik, K. (2010). The usage of UCGIS “Body of Knowledge” in European universities. Presentation AGILE Preconference Workshop, May 11, 2010. Guimaraes, Portugal.Google Scholar
  3. N.N. (1999). The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999 – Joint declaration of the European Ministers of Education.Google Scholar
  4. Painho, M. and P. Curvelo (2008). BoK E-Tool Prototype: An ontological-basedGoogle Scholar
  5. approach to the exploration of Geographic Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge. EUGISES. Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK.
  6. Rip, F. I. and R. J. A. van Lammeren (2010). Mapping Geo-Information Education In Europe. ISPRS 2010, Mid-Term Symposium Commission VI - Cross- Border Education for Global Geo-Information, Enschede, the Netherlands.
  7. Rousseeuw PJ (1987). Silhouettes: a Graphical Aid to the Interpretation and Validation of Cluster Analysis. Computational and Applied Mathematics 20: 53-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Skupin, A. and B.P. Buttenfield (1997). Skupin, A. and B.P. Buttenfield. 1997. /Spatial Metaphors for Visualizing Information Spaces. AUTOCARTO 13, ACSM/ASPRS ‘97 Technical Papers, Seattle, Washington, April 1997, 5, 116-125.
  9. Theodoridis S, Koutroumbas K (2006). Pattern Recognition 3rd edn, pp 635.Google Scholar
  10. Theodoridou L., Kariotis G., Panagiotopoulos E. and Kotzinos D. (2008), “On Structuring and Sharing Learning Material: A taxonomy for Geoinformatics and Surveying Engineering”, Proceedings of EUGISES 2008; Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Verboven S, Hubert M (2005). LIBRA: a MATLAB library for robust analysis. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 75(2): 127-136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Geo-InformationWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Geoinformatics and Surveying, TEI of SerresSerresGreece
  3. 3.Institute of Computer ScienceFoundation for Research and Technology – HellasHeraklionGreece

Personalised recommendations