EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OF INTEGRATED TEACHING OF TOPOGRAPHY, CARTOGRAPHY, AND GIS: METHODOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ON LEARNING OUTCOMES
Abstract
This article provides a scholarly analysis of the educational effectiveness of integrated teaching of Topography, Cartography, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and evaluates the impact of this approach on learning outcomes. The main purpose of the study is to identify differences between traditional, discipline-separated instruction and an integrated methodology in shaping learners’ spatial thinking, practical skills, and independent analytical abilities.
The research was conducted in accordance with the IMRAD methodology and employed a review of scholarly literature, pedagogical observation, comparative analysis, and methods for assessing learning activity outcomes. During the study, methodological solutions were designed, implemented, and tested based on the interrelated application of topographic measurements, cartographic representation, and spatial analysis within a GIS environment.
The findings indicate that, within the learning process organized on the basis of an integrated teaching model, students’ spatial thinking, competence in working with geospatial data, and ability to analyze real territorial problems increased significantly. In addition, higher levels of students’ interest in the subjects and greater learning activity were observed. The study’s conclusions demonstrate that implementing an integrated methodological approach in teaching Topography, Cartography, and GIS is an important factor in enhancing educational effectiveness and provides scientific and practical recommendations for application in higher education practice.
Keywords
integrated teaching; topography and cartography education; Geographic Information Systems (GIS); spatial thinking competence; practice-oriented methodology; assessment of learning outcomes; geospatial education technologies.How to Cite
References
Goodchild, M. F. (2004). The validity and usefulness of laws in geographic information science. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 94(2), 300–303.
Longley, P. A., Goodchild, M. F., Maguire, D. J., & Rhind, D. W. (2015). Geographic Information Systems and Science (4th ed.). Wiley.
Gersmehl, P., & Gersmehl, C. (2007). Spatial thinking by young children. Journal of Geography, 106(5), 181–191.
Bednarz, S. W., Heffron, S., & Huynh, N. T. (2013). A road map for 21st century geography education. National Geographic Society.
Fargher, M. (2018). WebGIS for geography education: Towards a GeoCapabilities approach. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 7(3), 111.
Matthews, A. J., & Wikle, T. A. (2019). GIS&T pedagogies and instructional challenges in higher education. Transactions in GIS, 23(5), 892–907.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
British Educational Research Association (BERA). (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research. BERA.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mahfuza Hasanovna Sangirova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
