Participation in this panel is by invitation. For information, contact organizer David DiBiase at firstname.lastname@example.org
Excitement about Data Science expressed research agencies, technology consultants, and higher education administrators has gotten geography’s attention. Some geographers and geography departments are responding with initiatives of their own. Others suspect a fad. Whatever one’s inclination, the emergence of a purported “science of data” raises interesting questions about the “science of geographic information,” with which many geography programs now identify.
This discussion will consider several of those questions, including:
1. Since the leading Data Science strategy documents (such as those by NAS, NIH, NSF) fail to call out spatial data as a distinctive data type, is it time to reconsider the claim that “spatial is special”?
2. Some geographers argue that GIS "has always been part of data science.” Is it really? How do the practices of data science and GIScience - and their associated curricula - actually compare?
3. What ethical challenges do data science and GIScience have in common? Do others stand in contrast?
4. Data Science tends to emphasize prediction, while explanation or understanding is more central to "traditional" science. Does this mean that engagement with Data Science will lead to some realignment of the underlying objectives of GIScience?
5. Which geographers and geography programs are engaging formally with Data Science, what are they doing, and what has been achieved?
|Introduction||David DiBiase Esri||10|
|Panelist||Michael Goodchild University of California||15|
|Panelist||Dieter Pfoser George Mason University||15|
|Panelist||Nicholas Tate University of Leicester||15|
|Discussant||Diana Sinton UCGIS||15|
|Panelist||Xinyue Ye New Jersey Institute of Technology||15|
To access contact information login