Author’s Contact Information: Thomas A. Wikle
Department of Geography 337 Murray Hall
Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK 74078
405 744-8709 [email protected]
A Look at GIS Certification Programs and their Challenges for Higher Education
Abstract: GIS certification programs recognize both professional competency and a commitment to standards of professional conduct. However, while certification programs have become more widespread in recent years, little is known about persons who have become certified, their employers (whether private, government, or non-profit) or the position titles they hold. This paper investigates GIS certification programs in the U.S. and abroad using data from certification registries. The analysis reveals the broad appeal of the Geographic Information System Professional (GISP) certification, even among persons certified by other organizations such as the American Society of
Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS). Along with providing a comparison of certification programs, the role of higher education is discussed in the context of efforts to move from portfolio-based procedures for evaluating certification applicants to competency-based systems that utilize an examination component.
Keywords: certification, geographic information systems, geospatial careers INTRODUCTION
Over the last 30 years geographic information systems (GIS) applications have become well-integrated within the fabric of private industry, government, higher education, and increasingly, K-12 education. The importance of GIS is underscored by a growing
number of jobs emphasizing or entirely focused on the storage, analysis, and visualization of spatial data. As a result, GIS is increasingly viewed as an attractive career path. Another sign is the emergence of programs to certify GIS professionals. In the last 23 years nearly 7,000 GIS professionals within the U.S. and abroad have become certified, mostly as Geographic Information System Professionals (GISPs) through a program administered by the U.S.-based GIS Certification Institute (GISCI). GIS certification recognizes both professional competency and a commitment to standards of professional conduct. However, in the midst of growth and demand for geospatial professionals, we know relatively little about the types of persons who have become certified or the
in certification requirements serve as an impetus to take a fresh look at higher education’s role in preparing GIS professionals.
This paper provides a brief assessment of GIS certification in the U.S. and abroad through an analysis of information available within certification registries. Along with revealing the size and scope of certification programs, an evaluation of certification registries offers a means of learning more about employment areas, position types and other patterns that characterize persons who have become certified. In addition, a review of the structure and objectives of certification may help define the role of higher
education as GIS certification continues to grow in importance within government, private industry, and non-profit organizations.
BACKGROUND
Driven by technological innovations and an explosion in the availability of spatial information, GIS and related geospatial fields have introduced exciting ways to utilize spatial information. For example, smart phones offer vehicle navigation and basic GIS functions such as an ability to superimpose geographic features or other information over maps or satellite images. At the same time, personal computers and tablet computing devices have introduced GIS functionality to schools, households and other places with wireless connectivity, enabling nearly anyone to query large spatial datasets.
In addition to consumer applications, GIS has introduced capabilities that serve
specialized types of information needs in research, facilities management, logistics, and decision-support within industry, government, and non-profit organizations. The growing demand for persons with some familiarity or experience with GIS is illustrated by a U.S. Department of Labor estimate that more than 200,000 Americans routinely utilize GIS within their jobs (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2010). The need for persons whose work focuses entirely on GIS is also expanding as noted in a CNN report listing GIS Specialist among the top 100 growth careers over the next ten years (CNN 2012). Higher education has answered the call to develop programs needed for training GIS professionals through courses, minors, certificates, degrees, and other initiatives.
However, while training and educational opportunities are more available than ever, GIS applications are increasingly diverse, making it difficult for colleges and universities to serve every new type of use and user. For example, some academic departments offer GIS through a course sequence with advanced topics that build on foundation work covered in basic or intermediate-level courses. At the same time an increasing number of students are interested in GIS from an applied perspective tied to areas such as urban planning or wildlife management. Unfortunately, students who approach GIS as a tool akin to software used for statistical analysis are often less willing to complete prerequisite courses needed for a deeper conceptual understanding of GIS and may have difficulty with advanced topics such as modeling.
Other problems can be seen when GIS coursework is available through more than one department and/or college. The absence of coordination on some campuses can result in
the same content being offered in two or more courses or a situation where important conceptual information isn’t covered in any course. Disagreement over learning outcomes can also contribute to students receiving foundation coursework that is
fragmented and discontinuous. For their part employers experience frustration when job applicants with otherwise similar academic backgrounds have very different abilities as they enter a professional setting. Such challenges have contributed to interest in
establishing GIS certification programs and in efforts to promote certification among GIS professionals.
CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS
Certification is a voluntary process. In fields such as planning, accounting and medicine certification encourages competency and promotes professional conduct and under most circumstances is supervised by an independent professional organization. Ayers and Kottmann (1994) suggest that certification could be thought of as a metaphor for public trust since practitioners who certify do so, in part, to distance themselves from persons whose work is of poor quality or whose actions are unethical.
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) maintains criteria for organizations that oversee professional certification programs. ANSI specifies that assessments such as exams used within a certification process should be based on standard industry
knowledge. In addition, ANSI guidelines stipulate that certification should be awarded for limited time periods and that certifying organizations should implement recertification requirements that mandate on-going professional development and/or activity. A number of academic disciplines and professional fields have longstanding certification programs including accounting (certified public accountant), medicine (board certified specialists), and planning (certified planner).
As noted by Barnhart (1997), the process used to evaluate applicants for certification fall into three broad categories: portfolio-based systems, competency-based systems, and curriculum-based systems. Applicants for portfolio-based certifications are asked to self-report their qualifications with points assigned to activities and accomplishments within established categories. In some cases supporting documentation is required to
demonstrate education, experience or professional service. Information received is subsequently compared against minimum criteria. In contrast, competency-based
systems require a written or practical test to evaluate an applicant’s mastery of a common body of knowledge and/or skill. Competency-based certifications require a greater commitment of resources to manage since a procedure must be in place for applicants to complete the required examination or practical test. In addition, examinations must be graded and assessment methods must be updated on a regular basis. Finally, curriculum-based certification involves the completion of training or formal coursework. Of the three, curriculum-based systems require the greatest commitment of resources.
GIS CERTIFICATION
Early discussions about the certification of GIS professionals were driven, in part, by disagreements among GIS users and professional surveyors (Wind and Bettinger 2003; Kemp 2003). Most proponents of certification cite its benefits for improving pubic trust, especially where government officials have responsibility for public safety such as health or emergency response (Sommers 2000; Harvey 2003). Certification also provides a pathway that encourages professionals to improve their knowledge and skills by
participating in continuing education and/or attending conferences. Having certified GIS professionals within an organization can enhance its prestige. Finally, certification encourages high standards of ethical conduct (Obermeyer 2009). On a broad scale, certification may also offer a framework for investigating the validity of allegations and complaints (Huxhold and Craig 2003)
Having previously implemented a certification program for photogrammetrists beginning in 1975, the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) introduced the first GIS certification in 1991 (Chamard 1985). Certified Mapping Scientist, GIS/LIS began as a portfolio-based system that required a demonstration of education and/or knowledge coupled with five years of work experience. As part of the documentation process, applicants sign a code of ethics and obtain reference letters. Mapping Scientists are certified for life but are required to recertify every five years to remain on the active certification registry.
Recognizing a need for improved levels of knowledge and conceptual understanding, ASPRS’s Evaluation and Certification Committee (ECC) began requiring all certification applicants to achieve a minimum score on an examination in 1999. Exam topics were designed to address core competencies in the mapping sciences, general sciences, and mathematics (Table 1). To assist applicants, ASPRS began offering certification workshops in conjunction with meetings.
Table 1. ASPRS CMS-GIS/LIS Examination --- Subject Area Percent of Questions --- math/science 14-16 engineering/surveying 5-6 physics 7-9 imaging 18-20 photogrammetry 10-13 GIS 21-23 ethics/general 15 ---
In 2003 ASPRS implemented an initiative to increase the pool of geospatial professionals who could potentially benefit from certification through a new designation called
“Certified Technologist, GIS/LIS.” The Certified Technologist designation was intended to recognize the growing number of GIS technicians whose work is more applied
compared to that of Mapping Scientists. To encourage young professionals to certify, the ECC introduced a program to provisionally certify undergraduate students wishing to become Certified Technologists and graduate students as Mapping Scientists. Students who meet other requirements and pass the exam can be provisionally certified without the required work experience and will become fully certified with the completion of five years of professional experience. Despite efforts within ASPRS to promote GIS certification the number of Mapping Scientists remains relatively small.
In the late 1990s the Urban and Regional Systems Association (URISA) began exploring the feasibility of offering its own certification program. A committee of GIS
professionals representing a wide range of academic, industry and government fields was assembled to consider how a new certification program might be structured and
administered. Following considerable discussion the committee proposed a portfolio-based pilot program where applicants would be evaluated on the basis of education, professional experience, and contributions to the wider community of GIS users (Grams 2004). Initially to be administered within URISA, committee members suggested the formation of a separate and independent organization to represent the largest possible range of GIS professionals. With support from URISA, the GIS Certification Institute (GISCI) was formed with a board of directors comprised by representatives from the Association of American Geographers (AAG), University Consortium for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS), National State Geographic Information Council (NSGIC), and URISA.
In 2003 GISCI initiated a test of its certification process by inviting members of URISA’s Georgia chapter to submit portfolios in support of their application to become
Geographic Information System Professionals (GISPs). Following the success of this trial, the program was opened to others in 2004. Consistent with ANSI guidelines, GISP certificate holders must recertify every five years by submitting materials that
demonstrate ongoing professional development. Recently, members of GISCI’s board of directors implemented plans to add an examination to certification requirements in 2015 that will be based on the GIS Body of Knowledge (BoK) and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Geospatial Technology Competency Model (Schtzberg 2011).
A few professional organizations outside the U.S. have introduced certification programs. For example, the Canadian Institute of Geomatics (CIG) offers a certification called Geomatics Specialist, GIS/LIS. Applicants must have six years of professional
experience in GIS or land information systems (LIS), reference letters, and must agree to abide by a code of ethics. A Geomatics Specialist must recertify every six years by demonstrating continued professional development. A similar certification program sponsored by the Surveying and Spatial Sciences Institute (SSSI) offers the Geographic Information Systems Professional-Asia Pacific (GISP-AP) certification to GIS
Professional certifications shouldn’t be confused with applications-specific certifications available within information technology disciplines. For example, the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) offers certification in the use of software for persons who receive a minimum exam score. ESRI certifications can be earned in applications ranging from ArcGIS Desktop, to ArcGIS Desktop Developer, Web Applications Developer, and Mobile Developer.
METHODS
Registries provide a source of information useful for evaluating the size and scope of GIS certification programs. For the purposes of this project registry data was obtained from websites maintained by ASPRS, GISCI, CIG and SSSI as of July 1, 2014. It should be noted that information available within each registry varies considerably. For example, the registry of GISPs maintained by GISCI lists the certificate holder’s name and address along with their job title, employer name and certificate date/number. In comparison, the ASPRS registry of Mapping Scientists, GIS/LIS includes the employer name but no information about an individual’s position/job title. Likewise, CIG and SSSI registries contain limited information about job title or employer. An important limitation of registries is that most list only active certification holders, making it difficult to assess historical trends in certification and recertification. For comparative purposes eight ASPRS Certified Technologists were excluded from consideration along with 15 persons holding provision certificates as Mapping Scientists, GIS/LIS.
FINDINGS
Although more recently established, the GISP Program has expanded rapidly and within its first year was already larger than the ASPRS’s Certified Mapping Scientist, GIS/LIS program. Between 2003 and 2013 GISCI averaged almost 600 new GISP certifications each year (Figure 1) and in 2008 and 2009 alone more than 2,700 GISP certifications were awarded. Summary statistics of GISP holders show the program’s diversity. GISP certificate holders are almost evenly split between government (45%) and
industry/consulting (42%). In contrast, a much larger percentage of ASPRS Mapping Scientists, GIS/LIS are employed in industry/consulting while fewer than 25% are employed in government (Table 2). In addition to comparing certification holders separately, a crosscheck was used to identify individuals holding both certifications. Among 73 Mapping Scientists, 30 (43%) also hold the GISP certification and nearly two thirds of these individuals were employed in industry or consulting.
Figure 1. GISP Certifications, 2003-13 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 Year G IS P C e rt if ic a tio n s
Table 2. GIS Certifications by Type of Employer Employment Type GISP Certification Holders CMS-GIS/LIS Certification Holders Holders of both Certifications
No. % No. % No. %
higher education 305 5 7 10 2 7 government 3,081 45 15 21 9 30 industry/consulting 2,836 42 38 52 18 60 not-for-profit 99 1 1 1 0 0 Unknown 488 7 12 6 1 3 TOTAL 6,809 73 30
Data contained in the GISP registry facilitates some additional comparisons. Table 3 provides an overview of job titles held by GISP certification holders and is based on frequency counts representing the number of times a word or text string appeared in the registry. The analysis reveals a wide range of position titles associated with real estate, marketing, hydrology, facilities management, transportation engineering, and many other areas. Using word counts, analyst was the most common position title (1,653) followed by specialist (919), and engineer (458). Manager (1,283) was the most frequently used supervisory title followed by coordinator (610) and director (304).
In comparison to U.S. certificate holders, the number of certified GIS professionals outside the U.S. is relatively modest. For example, only 15 persons have received GIG’s Geomatics Specialist, GIS/LIS certification and just five persons hold certifications as Geomatics Manager. As of July 2014 a total of 54 individuals hold ISSS’s GIS-AP certification with an average of just seven new certification holders added each year.
Table 3. Most Common GISP Position Titles
Position Title Number Position Title Number
analyst 1,653 geographer 73 specialist 919 cartographer 70 engineer 458 officer 41 consultant 247 architect 37 technician 244 geologist 22 planner 170 surveyor 20 programmer 142 researcher 8 developer 135 modeler 6 scientist 115 hydrologist 5 faculty/professor/instructor 110 librarian 3
Supervisory Title Number Supervisory Title Number
manager 1,283 administrator 183
coordinator 610 supervisor 161
director 304 lead 145
president/VP/CEO 190 principal 78
DISCUSSION
When considering the total number of GIS users an outside observer would likely say that the number of certified GIS professionals is extremely small. However, this finding shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that certification has been unsuccessful. The analysis of employer areas and job titles suggests that GISP appeals within a wide range of GIS application areas. More importantly, GISP is increasingly recognized by groups such as the National Association of Counties. In addition, eight state governments have endorsed GISP certification including California, Montana, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon and West Virginia. Compared to GISP, certification programs available through ASPRS, CIG, and ISSS appeal to a more limited range of geospatial professionals.
It remains to be seen how higher education will respond to the trend towards competency-based GIS certification that require applicants to pass a formal exam.
Although the BoK has begun to influence the design of courses (Wikle and Fagin 2014) it may be too soon to assess its impact in shaping programs such as minors, certificates and degrees in GIS. Nonetheless, the shift from portfolio-based systems to competency-based systems of evaluation may be the impetus needed by higher education to offer programs better aligned with the needs of GIS professionals.
The field of planning offers an example of how certification has strengthened the relationship between educational institutions and employers. The American Institute of City Planners (AICP) publishes examination pass rates for students at affiliated colleges and universities. For example, more than 95% of students attending Portland State University, the University of Wisconsin, and Tufts University passed the AICP exam in their first attempt (AICP 2014). In the future students interested in pursuing careers as GIS professionals may take into consideration examination pass rates in choices about the college or university they attend.
Challenges Ahead for Higher Education
As GIS certification becomes more popular, colleges and universities will be expected to offer programs that prepare students for entering professional settings and that prepare them for certification exams. Although degree programs in GIS are increasingly common (see Wikle and Finchum 2003), academic certificates have become the most widely available GIS programs at most colleges and universities. Most certificate programs require between 12 and 24 semester hours of coursework in GIS and related subject areas. Unfortunately, there is no definition or standard for the structure or content of a certificate. As a result, certificates vary considerably across institutions in terms of subject matter and expected outcomes (Wikle 1999). While some include a rigorous and well-planned sequence of coursework, others are simply collections of existing courses. The challenge for higher education will be to offer educational programs in sync with personnel needs in government, private industry and non-profit organizations. Following the example set by ASPRS, programs that engage students before they complete their degree may offer a venue for building stronger relationships between higher education and employers. Coursework based on the BoK and closely tied to outcomes defined within the Geospatial Competency Model can potentially improve a student’s transition from classroom to workplace as well as prepare them for the competencies and knowledge necessary to become certified. Internships will become increasingly important too as proving grounds for aspiring GIS professionals. The greatest challenge will be within colleges and universities that have limited resources to support a comprehensive framework of coursework needed to prepare students for certification.
CONCLUSION
Some have argued that the expansion of GIS across an increasingly broad range of
application areas remains problematic for certifying GIS professionals. The challenge for any organization that offers certification will be in balancing the need to be inclusive against the importance of defining common standards for knowledge and competency. In the long run GIS certification will be viewed as relevant if it can be successful in shaping and defining desirable qualities that employers need. The transition in favor of
competency-based systems for assessing certification candidates offers both challenges and opportunities for higher education institutions. In their competition for students, colleges and universities offering GIS programs may need to consider how best to
prepare students for certification examinations and other requirements. Aside from improving their competitiveness, certification may offer other advantages. For example, the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) cites data showing that certified planners earn median salaries more than $15,000 higher than non-certified planners (AICP 2014).
About the author: Thomas A. Wikle has written about GIS career preparation for more than 20 years. Dr. Wikle’s research has examined a wide range of topics including communications and broadcasting infrastructure in the U.S. He current serves as professor of geography and associate dean in the College of Arts and Sciences at Oklahoma State University.
References:
AICP (American Institute of Certified Planners) 2014, Salary Survey Summary, https://www.planning.org/salary/summary.htm
Ayers, L. and Kottmann, C. 1994, A Call for GIS Certification. GIS World 7(12), 48-52. Barnhart, P. 1997, The Guide to National Professional Certification (Amherst, MA: CRC Press).
Chamard, R.S. 1985, Certification, Another Criteria for the Evaluation of Professionals in the Spatial Data Arena, Proceedings of the 16th International Cartographic Conference, Barcelona, Spain, September 3-5, 1690-1694.
CNN. 2013, Best Jobs in America, CNNMoney/PayScale's top 100 careers with big growth, great pay and satisfying work.
http://money.cnn.com/pf/best-jobs/2013/snapshots/85.html
Grams, S. 2004, The History of the GISci Certification Program, http://www.gisci.org/AboutUs/History.aspx
Harvey, F.J. 2003, The Significance of Public Safety for GIS Professional Licensing and Certification. URISA Journal 15(1), 15-20.
Huxhold, W.E. and Craig, W. 2003, Certification and Ethics in the GIS Profession. URISA Journal 15(1), 51-64.
Kemp, K. 2003, GIS Professional Certification Matters to All of Us. Transactions in GIS 7(2), 159-163.
Obermeyer, N.J. 2009, Virtue Ethics for GIS Professionals, pp. 27-37 In G. Navratil (ed). Research Trends in Geographic Information Science (Berlin: Springer-Verlag).
Sommers, R. 2000, Defining the GIS Profession and Debating Certification and Regulation. Geo Info Systems (May), 22-29.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2012, http://www.bls.gov/data/
Wikle, T. 1999, GIS Education through Certification Programs. URISA Journal 11, 53-60.
Wikle, T. and Fagin, T. 2014, GIS Course Planning: A Comparison of Syllabi at US Colleges and Universities. Transactions in GIS 18(4), 574-585.
Wikle, T. and Finchum, G.A. 2003, The Emerging GIS Degree Landscape. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 27, 107-122.
Wind, M.G. and Bettinger, P. 2003, GIS: An Updated Primer on a Powerful Management Tool. Journal of Forestry 101(4), 4-8.