Multimedia Technology in Cartography and Geographic Education

  • Scott M. Freundschuh
  • Wesley Helleviks


We have become players in a rapid paradigm shift, a methodological evolution that has been fuelled by a proliferation of computer and information technology. Communication tools of 20 years ago included primarily the telephone and surface (or snail) mail. Today we add to our list of communication mediums e-mail, voice mail, fax, pager systems and overnight mail. It is probable that in 10 years, we will utilise multimedia mail that will integrate text, graphics, audio and video with this ever-expanding list (Noon 1991). We have seen similar technological changes rush into the classroom, offering educators multimedia tools as a platform for building lectures and practical laboratory experiences. Designers, developers and users of multimedia tools assert that this medium can alter the way people think and learn, how they communicate, and how they understand the world around them (Krygier, et al. 1997). A small but growing body of literature reports that computer assisted instruction can be equal, or superior to conventional instructional methods for student learning and achievement (Kulik, Kulik and Bangert-Drowns 1984; Niemiec and Walberg 1985). Though these results are encouraging, further analysis of this data (Clark 1985) indicated that the advantage of computer assisted learning was larger for short-term studies than longer-term studies, decreasing over time as the novelty of the technology diminished Fletcher (1990) compared instruction via interactive multimedia technologies to conventional instruction in various learning environments, including college level instruction, and found that students learning via multimedia tools had significantly higher achievement scores than students learning via conventional methods. Bosco (1986) found similar results in similar studies using multimedia tools.


Multimedia Presentation Multimedia Technology Skill Area American Geographer Multiple Intelligence 
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. Association of American Geographers (1998) ARGUS (Activities and Readings in the Geography of the United States) Project. URL:
  2. Checkley K (1997) The first seven…and the eighth: A conversation with Howard Garner. Educational Leadership 55: 1–5Google Scholar
  3. Clark RE (1985) Evidence for confounding in computer-based instruction studies: Analyzing the meta-analyses. Educational Communication and Technology Journal 33: 249–262Google Scholar
  4. Deasy GeoGraphics Laboratory (1994) Department of Geography, The Pennsylvania State University, The GAIA Project. URL:
  5. Edgeman L (1994) Teaching successional vegetation dynamics: A comparison of the effectiveness of animated and static graphics. Paper presented at the Joint Meeting of the CCA and NACIS, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, AugustGoogle Scholar
  6. Fletcher JD (1990) Effectiveness and cost of interactive videodisc instruction in defense training and education. Alexandria, VA. Institute for Defense AnalysesGoogle Scholar
  7. Garner H (1983) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligence. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  8. Gardner H (1987) The theory of multiple intelligences. Annals of Dyslexia 37: 19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gardner H (1993) Multiple Intelligence’s: The Theory In Practice. New York: Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  10. Geography Education Standards Project (1984) Geography For Life: National Geography Standards. Washington DC: National Geographic Research and ExplorationGoogle Scholar
  11. Koussoulakou A, Kraal(MJ (1992) Spatio-temporal maps and cartographic communication. The Cartographic Journal 29: 101–108Google Scholar
  12. Kulik C, Kulik J, Bangert-Drowns, RI, (1984) Effects of computer based education on secondary school pupils. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LAGoogle Scholar
  13. Krygier J B, Reeves C, DiBiase D, Cupp J (1997) Multimedia in geographic education. Journal of Geography and Higher Education 21: 17–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Milheim W (1993) How to use animation in computer assisted learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 24: 171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Molina L (1997) Geography: Realms, Regions and Concepts, Instructors Manual (8 ed.) New York: John Wiley and SonsGoogle Scholar
  16. Niemiec RP, Walberg HJ (1985) Computers and achievement in the elementary schools. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1: 435–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Philpotts A (1998) Evaluating multimedia: Keeping cartographic testing techniques current with changing technology. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Boston, MA, MarchGoogle Scholar
  18. Proctor JD, Sutton PC, Michaels GH (1995) Multimedia guided writing modules for introductory human geography. Journal of Geography 94: 571–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Noon JP (1991) Simulations in Education. Syllabus 15Google Scholar
  20. Shearer, Branton (1987) The MIDAS Project.Google Scholar
  21. Skinner BF (1938) The Behavior of Organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-CroftsGoogle Scholar
  22. Vasiliev I, Freundschuh SM, Mark DM, Theisen GD, McAvoy J (1990) What is a Map? The Cartographic Journal 119–123.Google Scholar
  23. Veenema S, Gardner H (1996) Multimedia and Multiple Intelligences, The American Prospect 29: 69–75Google Scholar
  24. Virtual Geography Department (1995) Department of Geography, University of Texas at Austin. URL:

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Scott M. Freundschuh
    • 1
  • Wesley Helleviks
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MinnesotaDuluthUSA

Personalised recommendations