PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION: WHERE DOES GIS GO FROM HERE?
Mary L. Johnson, Technical Writer Remington & Vernick Engineers
232 Kings Highway East Haddonfield, New Jersey 08033
ABSTRACT
An increasing number of certification options have become available to current and future GIS professionals, mostly during the past five years. College students and recent graduates now have the benefit of GIS coursework, where many respected GIS professionals had to learn the technology as it developed. Evening classes and long distance learning via the Internet have grown increasingly popular, allowing the working GIS professional to gain back some of this momentum.
Although there is no national standard for GIS certification and practice in the United States at this time, the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS), the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) and the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) offer their own distinct programs for professional certification in the mapping sciences. These programs are based on varying combinations of GIS experience, coursework and professional achievements.
But is certification really enough? Many GIS professionals work side by side with engineers and surveyors, whose practices are strictly governed by State licensing boards. GIS is a diversified technology that often crosses the boundaries into engineering and surveying, and has done so in such a way that both the engineering and surveying professions alternately seem determined to either acquire GIS as a sub-specialty or wholly dictate its use and development. What can GIS professionals do to solidify the practice of this technology as a separate and distinct occupation in its own right? How should it be governed, and by whom? This paper will explore the challenges and possibilities.
INTRODUCTION
I work in the CADD/Cartography/GIS Department in a civil engineering firm in southern New Jersey. I provide technical writing and related assistance as needed to promote my department’s mapping work to current and prospective clients. This provides me with a unique vantage point from which to observe the mapping, engineering and surveying professions that populate my firm and the civil engineering industry at large. I would like to share some of these observations during the course of this paper.
My department head began his career twenty years ago as a mechanical draftsman, but he was drawn to digital cartography and GIS as the need for this new specialization evolved. Until recently, he had little in the way of formal training or education in the digital cartographic field to recommend him. He had learned its ways and developed its practices as he went. Our firm has a very fine reputation now for its mapping work, with a number of State awards to our credit, and this man is at the heart of it. But as he developed his skills through practical application in response to a need, a new generation of digital cartographers and GIS specialists arose that had the benefit of high school and college level coursework to lend them credence. My department head, like many others with a history in the cartographic profession, has been suddenly and unfairly placed in a position where he feels the need to prove what he already knows through the acquisition of formal training, certificates and other paperwork that seem to lend him a validity he should already have.
The American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS), the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) and the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) GIS Certification Institute (GISCI) certification programs understand and recognize the value of professional experience as a means of gaining practical knowledge and mastering a craft. These programs don’t denounce the importance of education, but they don’t consider it the sole qualification for professional advancement, either. In addition to these certification programs, an increasing number of online study programs have been made available by colleges and universities across the country, providing degree and certificate programs in the GIS field. These laudable developments have allowed the first generation of digital cartographers and GIS professionals to achieve a level of
recognition previously unavailable to them because of the professional and family obligations often associated with working professionals in that age group.
My department head received his GISP certification through the URISA GISCI program earlier this year. Now he can present himself to the world as the GIS professional he has always been, and at long last he has a piece of paper that can back him up. He is seeking further legitimacy through other certifications, including the ASPRS Certified Mapping Scientist GIS/LIS and the Geomatics certificate offered by Rutgers University in New Jersey. He is justifiably proud of his accomplishments, particularly since he has invested so much of his time and talents into achieving them. The reaction from his peers, thus far, has been less than congratulatory. The surveyors feel that it is only a matter of time before GIS falls under their collective jurisdiction anyway, so they discount the entire certification process as meaningless. The engineers would also like more control over the GIS industry, but the path of acquisition for them is less clear. However, both factions seem to agree on one thing: being certified is not the same as being licensed.
Having followed these developments as an outside, though admittedly not impartial observer, I decided to do some research on the dual subjects of certification and licensure to understand the differences between the two, and to determine on a national level in which direction the GIS profession is or perhaps should be going to successfully meet the challenges ahead.
LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION
The type of licensing we are probably most familiar with is a driver’s license. The budding driver learns the rules of the road, practices under the auspices of a driving teacher or other licensed driver, then must pass written and driving skills tests in order to receive a license from the associated state. Although this example is greatly simplified, it typifies the licensing process in general for associated professions.
♦ Education
♦ Practical Experience ♦ Examinations ♦ Licensure
The certification process is often similar, although in the case of the GISP certification, no examination is required. A combination of practical experience and educational background equates to a certificate.
The main difference between being certified and being licensed is the regulatory process. Licensed professionals are strictly regulated in the practice of their occupations by a local, state or federal government agency or licensing board. With a driver’s license, an individual must essentially receive permission from the State Motor Vehicle Agency or similar entity to legally operate a motor vehicle. The driver’s license is evidence of that permission, which is only granted when specific criteria have been met. In the engineering and surveying professions, an individual must seek similar permission from the State licensing board in order to practice that occupation. The professional engineer or professional surveyor license is evidence that the recipient has met certain established standards.
Like a driver’s license, professional licenses must be renewed from time to time. The licensed individual must continue to show proof of competence in order to remain licensed. In the engineering and surveying professions, this is often accomplished through an ongoing education process coupled with actual work experience. And like a driver’s license, an occupational license can often be taken away in cases of incompetence or negligence. An incompetent driver may be reported to the police and brought before a judge. A licensed professional who displays incompetence, neglect of duty or any other misconduct would similarly be brought before the appropriate licensing board for censure or punishment.
What other types of occupations are licensed? Since the main goal of the licensing and associated regulatory process is to protect the general public, many of the occupations subject to the licensing process are obvious ones. Physicians, pharmacists, dentists, nurses and optometrists are governed by Boards, as are architects, engineers, surveyors, electrical contractors and various construction occupations. Attorneys are licensed by State Bar Examiners. Complaints can be lodged against any individual within these occupations, and the associated Board serves as the self-regulating agency.
Other occupations were more surprising. Boxers are regulated by the Athletic Control Board. Cemetery salespersons are regulated by the Cemetery Board. Jockeys are regulated by the Racing Commission. Plumbers are regulated by the Board of Examiners of Master Plumbers. Yet there is no Board to oversee the cartographic professional or to help ensure that the mapping product you pay for is reasonably accurate. Why is that?
Surveying and engineering purport to be exact sciences. GIS does not. This is demonstrated by the disclaimers placed on many hardcopy GIS mapping projects reminding us that GIS is “based on” surveys but is not a survey product itself. As a writer, I am well acquainted with both the good and bad connotations of the words “based on,” as in “based on a true story.” It implies that certain liberties have been taken with the facts in order to facilitate their presentation to the audience. The statement that GIS is “based on” surveys makes a similar implication that certain liberties may have been taken with the original survey data to facilitate its use and presentation in a GIS mapping database. Yet the fact that surveys are used at all in the realm of GIS has left the door open to misinterpretation and crossover issues between the two professions.
DEFINING THE USE OF GIS
The National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) writes and scores the exams for engineering and surveying licensure. The NCEES encourages the establishment of uniform laws, standards and procedures in all jurisdictions throughout the licensing process. As part of this vision, they established a Model Licensing Law and Model Rules of Conduct for engineering and surveying professionals.
The Model Law is essentially a guideline for any legislative body wishing to create or revise licensing legislation for engineering and surveying professionals. As its name implies, it is strictly a model that can be edited or added to as needed to suit the needs of each legislative body or jurisdiction using it. One important function of the Model Law is to define what the professions of engineering and surveying actually entail. Recommendations are made for educational requirements, examinations and practical experience that should be associated with licensure in each profession. In addition, the actual practice of each profession itself is carefully described and outlined on nearly a task by task basis. The NCEES updates and revises the Model Law periodically to reflect changes in technology or other aspects of professional practice. It was just such an update around 1996 that sparked a controversy regarding the use of photogrammetry and GIS/LIS technology in the surveying profession, and whether or not such use could or should be strictly governed by that profession.
The list of tasks associated with the survey profession in the Model Law is several paragraphs long and includes references to preparing maps and GIS. However, this portion of the document was worded in such a general way that the creation of virtually any mapping product could be interpreted to encroach upon the practice of surveying and/or require regulation by the surveying profession. No clear distinction between creating a GIS map based on survey data or using GIS within the survey profession to create survey-accurate data was made. In addition, it seemed that GIS technology was being singled out unfairly over other technology, such as global positioning systems (GPS), that could also be used by those outside the surveying profession to encroach upon its boundaries.
A Task Force consisting of members of the ASPRS, URISA, the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping (ACSM), the American Society of Civil Engineers – Geomatics Division (ASCE), the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC), the Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS), and the National Society of Professional Surveyors (NSPS) was convened to study this issue and recommend modifications to the Model Law that would enhance clarity.
The Task Force suggested replacement language for various portions of the Model Law for Surveying that would differentiate between using GIS to create an authoritative document for location purposes, such as a property survey, and using GIS to create referential mapping products only. This is similar to the general distinction between any original legal document and a copy, such as a deed or a check. The original document is considered the official document of record. A copy doesn’t generally carry the same weight, although it is still useful for certain applications. Therefore, the Task Force suggested that with GIS and digital mapping, it was all a matter of presentation. Whenever data is provided to the public specifically as a survey product, whether it is created with GIS or other means, it needs to be compiled and presented under the auspices of a Professional Surveyor. However, when previously prepared survey data is incorporated into general GIS mapping products created strictly as reference for land use, planning or similar applications, it does not need to be compiled and presented under the auspices of a Professional Surveyor. In essence, the Task Force suggested that a survey is an original legal document, but a GIS map that incorporates available survey data for referential purposes only is not.
The 2004 version of the Model Law seems to have taken the overall recommendations of the Task Force into account. However, new interpretations of the “based on” concept are cropping up regularly, like spot fires before a great conflagration. This is probably due to the lack of standardization that still permeates the GIS industry at large.
I tend to look at this issue strictly from a writer’s perspective. Can we, or even should we, ever hope to truly regulate the use of previously created material of any kind in the creation of something new? Will we get to a point where a child can’t even reference facts from an encyclopedia for a school report without fear of encroaching on the encyclopedia industry? If we don’t temper our desire for control with our collective need for self-expression in all professions and industries, we will be losing far more as a society than we can ever hope to gain. This is the same type of ongoing struggle that both fuels and inhibits the process of data sharing in the GIS industry. Somewhere along the way, an acceptable balance needs to be reached.
This is not to say that I don’t believe the GIS industry should be regulated in some manner. I believe that standards and ethics should be established within every profession. In the writing profession, we have the rules associated with copyright. In the surveying and engineering professions, the rules of practice are established within each state or jurisdiction. The question right now seems to be whether GIS is a profession in its own right, worthy of its own separate set of standards and practices, or whether GIS is merely a tool that is incorporated into many other professions and alternately subject to the rules and regulations established within each one.
IS GIS A TOOL OR A PROFESSION?
The computer is used in many different professions, including engineering, surveying, writing and GIS. In that sense, the computer is a tool. But the way the computer, or any tool, is used within or by a particular profession is part of what defines that profession in the first place. The way I use my computer in the practice of my writing profession will be entirely different from the way an engineer uses a computer to create a bridge design, or the way a surveyor uses a computer to create a property survey. The tools overlap, but the way they are used and the end product they create are entirely dictated by the profession using them. The same is true of GIS.
There are other similarities as well. The computer, although used as a tool within many diverse professions, has spawned a diverse profession in its own right. The Information Technology industry creates and defines the use of computer systems across all other professions. If a computer is a tool, the IT profession has become the toolmaker. If GIS is a tool, the GIS profession is gradually establishing itself as the toolmaker.
But can GIS truly become a single profession in its own right when it is used as a tool in so many other professions? Can it be standardized in such a way that it can be used within those other professions without becoming solely the province of any one of them? Can it become self-regulating and self-governing like the engineering and surveying professions? And if so, how would it begin?
It might be argued that the GIS profession is not so much one overall profession as a collection of sub-specialties. When searching for GIS coursework in the curriculum of any college or university, it may be found under the guise of geography, environmental science, geology, planning or computer technology, to name a few. A graduating student may receive a GIS certificate, a GIS Technician Certificate, a Professional Certificate in GIS, a GIS Programmers Certificate, a Certificate in Geomatics, a Degree in Geographic Science, a Graduate Certificate in GIS, or a Masters of Science in GIS, depending on the educational facility or field of study chosen.
The medical profession is similarly a collection of sub-specialties, and a graduating student may become a surgeon, a psychiatrist, a cardiologist, a pediatrician or an anesthesiologist, to name just a few. The engineering profession is also comprised of various sub-specialties, including chemical engineers, civil engineers, electrical engineers and mechanical engineers. The main difference between the multiplicity of these professions and that of the GIS profession is when the specialization factor occurs. With the medical and engineering professions, as with many other multi-faceted professions, there is a core level of competency that must be achieved by all practitioners before an area of specialization can be considered. This creates a cohesiveness within each profession that could be likened to the many branches of a tree spreading out from a single, well-defined trunk. With GIS, the branches are there, but the trunk they extend from is less well-defined.
As far back as the 1988-89 school year, the National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA) established a GIS Core Curriculum as a guide for educational facilities interested in teaching GIS technology. Their comprehensive list of coursework for all future GIS professionals included global positioning, map projections, spatial relationships, computer systems, types of data, cartographic design, and database planning. Yet there is still no accreditation of GIS educational programs, and no single authority to oversee its practice. There are GIS Councils and similar entities in many states, but they seem more interested in standardizing GIS data than in standardizing those who use it.
Even the definition of what constitutes a GIS professional will vary from organization to organization. The ASPRS certification programs naturally lean toward a photogrammetry and remote sensing background. The IAAO certification programs naturally lean toward an assessing or CAMA background. The GISCI certification program
has a point system for scoring experience in areas such as data analysis, programming, teaching and project management. The only common ground seems to the tool: GIS technology itself. Those in the medical profession practice medicine, those in the engineering profession practice engineering, and those in the GIS profession practice or use GIS technology on a regular basis as part of their daily duties.
WORKING BACKWARD FROM THE BRANCHES
Those who routinely use GIS technology in the performance of their work are those best qualified to establish its future. But it will require working backward from the branches to define that cohesive core and solidify GIS as a separate and distinct profession in its own right. Rather than trying to create this elusive framework at a national level, it may be more prudent to approach it collectively from a local level. Although the existing Board professions each have a national governing body, the real regulation of practice occurs at the state level. An engineer or surveyor cannot practice in multiple states without having a license in each one. For GIS, a good place to start might be the local and regional user groups.
There are GIS user groups encompassing county, state and regional territories throughout the country. Some user groups are confined to a particular GIS software product or a particular GIS application, while others are more generalized in scope. However, they all have one thing in common: they are comprised of people who use GIS for cartography, research, teaching, data analysis and a variety of other work related practices. In other words, they are comprised of GIS professionals.
The GIS user groups will have the most complete collective knowledge of any GIS standards pertaining to their particular localities or specialties. They have already demonstrated their dedication and commitment to the GIS profession simply by coming together regularly on their own time to discuss its techniques and practices. These are the individuals most able to establish the core competency guidelines, codes of ethics and other standards of practice that emulate the Professional Board system. With the ongoing changes in GIS technology, particularly in the real-time routing, dispatch and emergency management applications, it seems likely that legislation to regulate GIS practice will ultimately be needed to protect the public interest. Why not begin now to fashion this new infrastructure from within each user group, and to select the future board members from among their ranks that will ultimately take charge of the GIS profession and lead it into the future?
There is a lot to be done. I see that every time I wear my GIS Day tee shirt and people come up to me and ask what GIS is by pronouncing it phonetically. This is a great opportunity for teaching, but it also shows how unaware most people are about the entire GIS profession. What is a GIS professional? What are the requirements for education and practice? Perhaps the Model Law concept, which works so well at defining the engineering and surveying professions, could ultimately provide the parameters for the GIS profession as well.
LAYING THE GROUNDWORK
Before people can aspire to the GIS profession, they need to know what it is. The United States Department of Labor suggests some level of expertise in the following areas:
♦ Information technology, including database design and management ♦ Geography and cartography, including map design and spatial relationships ♦ GIS technology, including software and data conversion
♦ Other essential skills, including mathematics, presentation and training
The NCGIA GIS Core Curriculum concurs with many of these guidelines, but suggests knowledge in the following related areas as well:
♦ Global positioning ♦ Map projections ♦ Computer systems
The following additional guideline could also be added, to be further defined by each user group in accordance with its locality:
♦ Knowledge of the appropriate local, state, regional and national mapping regulations and standards
These elements are already common, to at least some extent, in all practicing GIS professionals. They can also be incorporated into the educational requirements for future GIS professionals. Any specialization would only be possible after the minimum established standards were met. An internship in the appropriate specialty might also be
required. This is similar to the process used in the engineering and surveying fields to allow new graduates to obtain work knowledge prior to formal licensing.
Examinations can lend additional credence, even for established professionals. Although some certification programs allow work experience to substitute for more formal qualifications, is this really enough? Other certificate or diploma programs outside the GIS industry don’t seem to think so. For example, if an individual does not receive a high school diploma at the usual time in life, but wishes to receive one later on, life experience alone does not qualify. An examination is necessary to prove that the individual in question has achieved the same level of knowledge that is generally associated with a high school diploma. A similar process in the GIS industry would prove that anyone seeking certification or licensure as a GIS professional has the core level of competency required, whether that level of competency resulted from work experience, classroom study or some combination of the two. Both the IAAO and ASPRS require a written examination as part of their certification programs.
Examinations play a key role in the licensing process for engineers and surveyors as well. Generally speaking, a new engineering school graduate will take an examination covering the fundamentals of the profession. Upon passing the exam, the new graduate becomes an “engineer in training” or “intern.” After gaining practical experience on the job for a pre-established time period, engineering interns take an additional examination that covers their chosen specialty, such as civil engineering or chemical engineering. Licensure is granted upon successful completion of the second exam. The process is similar for the aspiring surveyor.
Examination and licensure could level the playing field for the GIS profession. Currently, the seasoned GIS practitioner in search of a job may initially outpace the new GIS graduate by virtue of experience. However, once the new graduate has been in the workforce for a few years, the combination of a degree with even a limited amount of on-the-job experience may be difficult for a non-certified or non-degreed professional to compete with. One possibility would be to require a fundamentals examination and a set internship period for all GIS graduates, followed by a specialty examination prior to licensure. For seasoned GIS professionals, a grandfathering process that substituted experience for college coursework but still required both sets of examinations might be a reasonable alternative.
Another possibility is the use of examinations to make college level GIS certificates more accessible to the experienced professional. Since all but the highest level of college coursework is likely to be redundant, why not allow the working GIS professional to simply take the exam associated with completing a particular course, rather than having to sit through the actual classes at the expense of work or family? This might encourage more professionals to seek these credentials, thus adding to the integrity of the profession.
Part of the self-regulating system associated with Professional Boards and the licensing process is to establish and maintain professional standards and ethics. Local, state or regional Boards consisting of reputable GIS professionals and educators, as well as members of the general public, would serve as guardians of the profession. Any questions, accolades or complaints regarding the GIS professionals under each Board’s jurisdiction would be directed to and handled at that level. Disciplinary action for negligence, incompetence or professional misconduct would be part of each Board’s responsibility. Both the ASPRS and GISCI certification programs have established strict codes of ethics for those receiving their certificates. ASPRS also has a peer review system in place to oversee the compliance process. Receiving and maintaining the public’s trust is an awesome responsibility. Once again, the user group community in each state or region is likely to be well acquainted with the issues and concerns indigenous to their locations.
Another useful function of the Professional Board system is the creation and maintenance of professional directories. Establishing a centralized and accessible listing of GIS professionals, whether by specialty, region or state, would provide an important source of reference for prospective clients or employers. The ASPRS and GISCI websites currently offer searchable online directories of GIS professionals certified through their respective programs. It is important that these and other online directories remain accessible to the general public and not just the associated membership.
Perhaps the most important consideration of all for any future GIS Board will be the establishment of ongoing educational requirements for license renewal. GIS technology is constantly evolving, along with the software and computer systems that empower it. Keeping pace with these changes will be both exciting and challenging.
CONCLUSION
Is a Professional Board system and licensing process really the way to go for the GIS profession? Would the associated regulations be a help or a hindrance to the profession’s growth? Only time will provide the answers.
Although the issues of public health, safety and welfare that have impelled the licensing process in other professions seem less tangible in the GIS industry today, new GIS applications are constantly being developed that may one day raise the same concerns. If licensing is truly the next step for the GIS profession, it is my hope that the profession itself will lead the charge, and not simply be absorbed by another profession with licensing standards already in place. It is a future worth lobbying for.
REFERENCES
American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing: Certification and Recertification Guidelines for the ASPRS Certification Program
http://www.asprs.org/membership/certification/certification_guidelines.html
National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis: The NCGIA Core Curriculum in GIScience http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/
International Association of Assessing Officials: Cadastral Mapping Specialist (CMS) http://www.iaao.org/education/Designation_CMS_program.asp
GIS Certification Institute: The GIS Certification Program for Professionals http://www.gisci.org/certificationprogramdescrption.htm
The National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying: Licensure for Land Surveyors http://www.ncees.org/licensure/licensure_for_land_surveyors/
The National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying: Licensure for Engineers http://www.ncees.org/licensure/licensure_for_engineers/
National Society of Professional Engineers: Becoming Licensed as a Professional Engineer http://www.nspe.org/lc1-how.asp
The National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying: Model Law (Revised August 2004) http://www.ncees.org/introduction/about_ncees/ncees_model_law.pdf
GIS/LIS Addendum to the Report of the Task Force on the NCEES Model Law for Surveying http://www.acsm.net/gislisreport.pdf
The New York State Department of Labor: Your Rights as A Worker: Licenses http://www.labor.state.ny.us/working_ny/worker_rights/licenses.html
America’s Career InfoNet: Licensed Occupations in the State of New Jersey http://www.acinet.org/acinet/lois_agency.asp?stfips=34&by=state&x=71&y=24
