Abstract
Digital aerial and satellite images are easily accessible for public use and frequently employed in social media. The widespread publishing of aerial and satellite images has raised questions about how non-experts interpret these images, how they are able to interpret orthogonal and oblique images and true-colour and not-true-colour images and how they contend with an absence of text or object descriptions in these documents. Research participants (11-, 15- and 19-year-old students) were asked to solve spatial tasks in images and maps of various types. Differences in the efficiency of task solution regarding various types of source documents were analysed, and the generated scores were evaluated according to the participants’ age and gender. Schoolchildren and students were asked to provide their opinions on the difficulty of reading the various image types and their preference for either maps or images as a source for acquiring information. From our study we conclude that:
-
1.
Age has an impact on the efficiency of image and map interpretation. Younger students, for example, 11-year-olds are better at handling tasks in images, while for 15-year-olds the difference between handling tasks in images and maps is much smaller. Lastly, 19-year-old students can better solve tasks in maps.
-
2.
The efficiency of interpretation varies based on gender and source material. The efficiency of solving tasks in aerial images is comparable. Eleven-year-old girls can handle tasks in maps better than boys of the same age. In the groups comprised of 15- and 19-year-olds, the boys are much more successful.
-
3.
The results of the evaluation of objective efficiency regarding image and map interpretation correspond with the subjective preference for maps or images: 11-year-old students prefer images; 19-year-old students prefer maps.
-
4.
Not-true-colour images are subjectively considered very difficult to interpret, but objective results do not confirm this. Students achieved higher scores for tasks in not-true-colour images than in true-colour images. The purpose of this research is to discover effective teaching methods in geography and to support the integration of aerial and satellite images in education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blaut, J. M. (1997). The mapping abilities of young children: Children can. Annals of American Geographers, 87(1), 152–158.
Blaut, J. M., McCleary, G. S., & Blaut, A. S. (1970). Environmental mapping in young children. Environment and Behavior, 2(3), 335–349.
Catling, J. S. (1978). The child’s spatial conception and geographic education. Journal of Geography, 77(1), 24–28.
Chang, K., & Antes, J. J. R. (1987). Sex and cultural differences in map reading. The American Cartographer, 14(1), 29–42.
Downs, R. M., & Liben, L. S. (1997). The final summation: The defense rests. Annals of American Geographers, 87(1), 178–180.
Geoportal (2015). Národní geoportál INSPIRE. https://geoportal.gov.cz/web/guest/home. Accessed 30 July 2015.
Gerber, R. V. (1981). Young children’s understanding of elements on maps. Teaching Geography, 1, 128–133.
Golledge, R. G., Marsh, M. J., & Battersby, S. J. (2008). A conceptual framework for facilitating geospatial thinking. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(2), 285–308.
Kim, M., Bednarz, R., & Kim, J. (2012). The ability of young Korean children to use spatial representations. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 21(3), 261–277.
Kovařík, V. (2012). Effects and limitations of spatial resolution of imagery for imagery intelligence. Proceedings of the International Conference on Military Technologies and Special Technologies – ICMT’-2012 (pp. 363–368). Trenčín: Alexander Dubček University of Trenčín.
Lee, J., & Bednarz, R. (2012). Components of spatial thinking: evidence from a spatial thinking ability test. Journal of Geography, 111(1), 15–26.
Liben, L. S. (1999). Developing an understanding of external spatial representation. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Development of mental representation. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Liben, L. S., & Downs, R. (1989). Understanding maps as symbols: Development of map concepts in children. In Reese H. (Eds.), Advances in child development, New York: Academic Press.
Liben, L. S., & Downs, R. (1992). Developing an understanding of graphic representations in Children and Adults: The Case of GEO-Graphic. Cognitive Development, 7, 331–349.
Liben, L. S., & Yekel, C. A. (1996). Preschoolers’ understanding of plan and oblique maps: The role of geometric and representational correspondence. Child Development, 67(6), 2780–2796.
Lillesand, T., Kiefer, R. W., & Chipman, J. W. (2008). Remote sensing and image interpretation. New York: Wiley.
Lloyd, R., Hodgson, M. E., & Stokes, A. (2002). Visual categorization with aerial photographs. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92(2), 241–266.
MacEachren, A. M. (2004). How maps work: Representation, visualization, and design. New York: The Guilford Press.
Muir, M., & Blaut, J. (1969). The use of aerial photographs in teaching mapping to children in first grade: An experimental study. The Minnesota Geographer 22 (pp. 4–19). New York: Wiley.
Pravda, J. (2001). Výskum niektorých stránok kartografickej gramotnosti. [Research of certain aspects of cartographic literacy]. Bratislava: Geografický ústav SaV.
Robinson, A. H., & Petchenik, B. B. (1977). The map as a communication system. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 1(14), 92–110.
Schuit, W. (2011). A method for teaching topographic map interpretation. Journal of Geography, 110(5), 209–216.
Schultz, R. J., Kerski, J. J., & Patterson, T. C. (2008). The use of virtual globes as a spatial teaching tool with suggestions for metadata standards. Journal of Geography, 107(1), 27–34.
Stea, D., & Blaut, J. (1973). Some preliminary observations on spatial learning in school children. In R. M. Downs & D. Stea (Eds.), Image and environment. Chicago: Aldine.
Svatoňová, H., & Rybanský, M. (2014). Visualization of landscape changes and threatening environmental processes using digital landscape model. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environmental Science, 18, 012018. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/18/1/012018.
Van Coillie, F., Gardin, S., Anseel, F., Duyck, W., Verbeke, L., & De Wulf, R. (2014). Variability of operator performance in remote-sensing image interpretation: The importance of human and external factors. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 35(2), 754–778.
Van der Schee, J. A. (1987). Kijk op Kaarten [Look at maps] (Dissertation). Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
Van der Schee, J. A. (2000). Helping children to analyse a changing world: Looking for patterns and relationships in space. In M. E. Robertson & R. Gerber (Eds.), The child’s world: Triggers for learning (pp. 214–231). Camberwell: ACR Press.
Wiegand, P. (2002). Learning and teaching with maps. Abingdon: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Svatoňová, H. (2017). Reading Satellite Images, Aerial Photos and Maps: Development of Cartographic and Visual Literacy. In: Karvánková, P., Popjaková, D., Vančura, M., Mládek, J. (eds) Current Topics in Czech and Central European Geography Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43614-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43614-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43613-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43614-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)