Say one thing good and one thing bad (ok, constructive criticism) about Geog 112.
Much like a dawg’s haircut, Geog 112 is a work in progress. Or maybe it’s fine as is.
Learning goals for this course: these should be in the syllabus!
- Technological competence: you are functional with a diversity of technologies, software, moving data from one form to another, and learning how to solve problems.
- Methodological competence: Given an understanding of the technologies, you understand the process for addressing questions and generating understanding in ES and Geography
- Mapping competence: Understand and be able to use guidelines for creating effective maps and using GIS to effectively communicate and understand.
- Critical competence: Understand mapping (and all geospatial technologies) as powerful and complex (eg., propositions rather than representations), and open to a range of insights from perspectives such as feminism and indigenous theory.
A few areas of interest upon pondering the class:
- I’m not a control freak about attendance and formal classroom decorum. Is that a problem or a benefit?
- Too little work in course? It feels like it was easy to keep up without too much hassle and there could be room for more stuff on
- HTML/Web scripting programs (cooler looking web stuff)
- More mapping types (beyond the choropleth)
- ArcGIS Online and it’s ability to create map apps
- Field data collection including sensory/mental mapping exercise
- Balancing less stress with enough learning: The instructor is not fond of stress and macho over the top loads of coursework, but understands that some very stressful courses also result in significant learning, and some low-stress courses are blow-offs. How to achieve a balance?
- The Three Shirt Situation: did it bother anyone that I cycled through three different short-sleeve shirts all semester? I really like them and don’t like my other shirts.