NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 1 

Geospatial Workforce Development 

 

A compendium of white papers focused on 

advancing geospatial workforce development. 

A Report of the 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee 

January 2012 

 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 2 

Table of Contents 

Preface ................................................................................................................................................ 3 

The Administration’s STEM Education Initiatives from a Geospatial Workforce Development 

Perspective .......................................................................................................................................... 4 

Background/Overview ..................................................................................................................... 4 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices ................................................................................................. 5 

Opportunities and Challenges .......................................................................................................... 5 

Active Organizations and Their Focus ............................................................................................... 7 

Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 7 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links ............................................................................................ 8 

Opportunities to Utilize the DOL Geospatial Competency Model to Meet Federal/State/Local/Tribal 

Government Needs ............................................................................................................................. 9 

Background/Overview ..................................................................................................................... 9 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices ................................................................................................. 9 

Opportunities and Challenges ........................................................................................................ 11

Active Organizations and Their Focus ............................................................................................. 12 

Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 12 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links .......................................................................................... 13 

Updating “Externally” Focused [GIS Themed] SOC Standard Occupational Classification Codes and 

“Internally” Focused Federal Occupational Series Classifications ....................................................... 14 

Background/Overview ................................................................................................................... 14 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices ............................................................................................... 14 

Opportunities and Challenges ........................................................................................................ 15 

Active Organizations and Their Focus Areas ................................................................................... 15 

Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 16 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links .......................................................................................... 16 

Summary of Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 18 

Note – This paper was adopted by the NGAC on January 12, 2012 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 3 

Preface 

The United States is a world leader in geospatial technology and research, an area that represents a 

multi-billion sector of the US economy. This high growth, high technology industry acquires, manages, 

analyzes, integrates, maps, distributes, and uses geographic, temporal, and spatially based information 

and knowledge to fuel major sectors of the US economy. The industry includes research, technology 

development, education, and applications to address the planning, decision-making, and operational 

needs of people and organizations of all types. 

This vital industry faces a serious workforce development challenge. A shortage of qualified and skilled 

workers exists to meet the demands of this fast growing industry. Efforts must be undertaken across all

levels of government, private sector, academic community, and professional associations to prepare 

workers to take advantage of new geospatial job opportunities in high demand and economically vital 

sectors of the American economy. 

Establishing an effective geospatial job market requires a direct connection between the employer’s job 

requirements and the geospatial skills of the workforce. Determining the competencies that employers 

require in order to satisfy their business needs in the geospatial industry is critical. A competency-based 

approach for defining required skills becomes necessary in technology-based occupations such as the 

geospatial profession. Solving these workforce issues requires new methods, practices, partnerships, and

outreach for this high growth, high technology industry among industry, academia, and government. 

Advancing the Nation’s geospatial workforce will result in a set of benefits where: 

• Public awareness of geospatial technologies and their applications are raised, and better 

connections are built between the geospatial industry and diverse populations of potential 

workers; 

• Public and private organizations can build partnerships with educational institutions at all levels 

to create effective and efficient geospatial training and education, and recruitment programs; 

• Commercial, academic, nonprofit organizations, and all levels of government use a 

complementary set of geospatial competencies to support systematic geospatial learning and 

development of training and education programs and curricula; 

• Effective and compelling public outreach programs and informational materials about the 

geospatial profession are distributed through geospatial professional organizations and existing 

DOL-supported education and information channels; and 

• A set of skills standards describe the kinds of workers needed to support the geospatial industry; 

improve employee recruitment and selection; and advance geospatial technology. 

These direct and indirect benefits ultimately work to better align educational, employment, and workforce 

development programs with employers’ labor needs, ultimately providing public and private organizations 

with the knowledge and skills employees need to be successful. 

The Subcommittee has developed this white paper to describe the challenges and advancements with 

geospatial workforce development and to set a context from which in part we will base our future 

discussions. While this paper is not meant to be all-inclusive with geospatial workforce development, we do 

believe it highlights the major elements and identifies a number of recommendations for moving forward. 

We encourage the reader to follow our deliberations and progress at www.fgdc.gov/ngac. Special thanks go 

John Mahoney and Tricia Longo Gibbons for their direction and support in developing this document. 

Dave DiSera 

Chair, NGAC Geospatial Workforce Development Subcommittee 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 4 

The Administration’s STEM Education Initiatives 

from a Geospatial Workforce Development Perspective

By: Matt O’Connell, Don McKay, Joanne Gabrynowicz 

Research Assistance and Contributions by Uyen Dinh 

Background/Overview 

The goals of this paper are to examine opportunities for synergies with the Administration’s Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education initiatives, assess opportunities to incorporate 

Geospatial and Geomatics education into the four STEM categories, and assess potential 

role/involvement/support from FGDC and NGAC. 

As a job sector, the geospatial technology field is exploding. Jobs are being created faster than we can find 

the minds we need to fill them. The Department of Labor recently identified geospatial technology as one of 

fourteen sectors “projected to add substantial numbers of new jobs to the economy or affect the growth of 

other industries or are being transformed by technology and innovation requiring new sets of skills for 

workers.” Furthermore, geospatial technology requires cutting edge scientific and engineering analyses, 

utilizes high-end computing technology, and involves fundamental understanding of mathematical principles. 

Despite this amazing industry growth and innovation, and congruence with all aspects of STEM, few 

educational programs integrate geography and geospatial education within the STEM curriculum. 

The Workforce Development Subcommittee believes that inclusion of geospatial disciplines in the White 

House STEM initiatives would increase the probability that the initiatives will be successful and increase the 

degree of their success. To that end, the Subcommittee believes NGAC should engage those decision makers 

entrusted with implementing the Administration’s vision, e.g., the White House Committee on Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Math education (CoSTEM) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), to 

illuminate the importance and benefits of developing a highly skilled geospatial workforce through STEM 

education. 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices 

The Administration’s Support for STEM 

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education is a national imperative. In the 21st 

century, technology is a fundamental driver of economic growth and prosperity, especially in the U.S. Studies 

show that technological innovation accounted for almost half of U.S. economic growth over the past 50 

years. Almost all of the 30 fastest-growing occupations in the next decade will require a background in STEM.i 

President Obama identified STEM education as a “national priority” and established the “Educate to 

Innovate” campaign in 2009 to mentor the next generation of technological leaders. Congress also strongly 

supports STEM, as evidenced by the passage of “America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote 

Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Reauthorization Act” or “America COMPETES” in 2010. This

act called for the creation of the Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education 

(CoSTEM) within the White House’s National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). Launched in March 

2011, CoSTEM seeks to develop the strategic groundwork for effective STEM education investments. 

CoSTEM’s focus is to create an inventory of federal STEM education activities and to develop a five-year 

strategic federal STEM education plan.ii

Today, the Federal Government has a handful of programs directly related to geospatial or remote sensing.

For example, the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Geography and Spatial Sciences (GSS) Program seeks to 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 5 

advance discovery, basic understanding, and education in geography and the spatial sciences. iii In addition, 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and 

Technology (CREST) Center encourages research on all aspects of remote sensing including sensor 

development, satellite remote sensing, ground-based field measurements, data processing and analysis, 

modeling, and forecasting.iv However, the fact that only a couple of Federal agencies have created STEM 

programs to directly promote the geospatial and remote sensing fields indicate there are challenges in 

Federal STEM education prioritization and implementation. 

Opportunities and Challenges 

Challenges to Government-wide STEM Education 

For fiscal year 2012, the President’s total budget request was $3.4 billion for STEM programs across all 

federal agencies.v Despite this robust political support for STEM education, planning for STEM education is 

inconsistent. No single definition exists delineating which subject areas STEM education incorporates. The 

closest Administration-approved description of STEM is from a September 2010 President’s Council of 

Advisors on Science and Technology report stating: 

‘“STEM education,” as used in this report, includes the subjects of mathematics, biology, 

chemistry, and physics, which have traditionally formed the core requirements of many state 

curricula at the K-12 level. In addition, the report includes other critical subjects, such as computer 

science, engineering, environmental science, and geology, with whose fundamental concepts K-12 

students should be familiar. The report does not include the social and behavioral sciences, such as 

economics, anthropology, and sociology; while appropriately considered STEM fields at the 

undergraduate and graduate levels, they involve very different issues at the K-12 level.’vi 

The definition’s ambiguity hampers everyone’s ability to determine what programs fall under a STEM 

curriculum. Members of the Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO) expressed concern, in a letter to

the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, that this report defines STEM fields far too 

narrowly, thus excluding core social science disciplines such as geography. 

In a 2005 report on Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related 

Trends, the GAO attempted to classify STEM programs into nine STEM fields for students, eight STEM fields 

for graduates, and the four broad STEM fields for occupations.vii This list of classifications differs from other 

federal lists, such as the Department of Homeland Security’s STEM-Designated Degree Program List, which 

endeavors to list every possible collegiate degree related to STEM.viii With the recent creation of CoSTEM, the 

members of this committee will begin the challenging process of creating a cohesive strategy to classify STEM 

education in order to introduce clarity, prevent redundancies, and improve program effectiveness. 

With almost every federal agency hosting several STEM-related programs, there are many niche projects 

across the government that might be used to advance STEM in a coordinated fashion but are not. The same 

2005 GAO report found that in the 13 federal civilian agencies surveyed, the Federal Government spent over 

$2.8 billion on STEM for 209 different programs. It further reported that coordination among these programs 

was limited.ix STEM education programs focus on topics ranging from long division for kindergarteners to 

molecular biology for doctoral candidates. 

In measuring the effectiveness of any initiative, the outputs of the programs must be examined in order to 

evaluate successes and areas for improvement. Many of the STEM programs do not undergo rigorous 

analysis to understand what inspires students to enter STEM degrees and occupations. Initial findings from 

university officials and researchers indicate that quality of teachers in kindergarten through 12th grades and 

the levels of mathematics and science courses completed during high school ultimately influence decisions to 

pursue STEM degrees.x 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 6 

The Associate Executive Director of the STEM Coalition, an alliance working aggressively to raise awareness 

and foster policies to support STEM education, confirmed in an interview that there is no central location 

where STEM programs are administered within the Federal Government. Programs are scattered among 

many federal (and state) agencies. Therefore, different agencies may interpret the list of STEM degree 

programs to suit their agencies’ unique needs. While most agencies with active programs maintain their own 

lists and requirements, it is often difficult to ascertain where they are located organizationally. 

Currently, the Coalition is observing the work of the White House CoSTEM and expects the Inventory of 

Federal STEM Programs being conducted by a working group of the CoSTEM to be available in the next few 

months. There is also a CoSTEM Working Group to explore federal coordination of STEM programs. It is 

anticipated that once both reports are completed, programs will be evaluated as to results and impact. 

It was also noted in the interview that the GAO was in the process of updating its 2005 Report: Higher 

Education Federal STEM Programs and Related Trends. The 2005 Report included data on over 200 Federal 

STEM programs as well as data on students and graduates in STEM fields. 

Challenges with Geography/Geospatial Education 

The geospatial field is accelerating rapidly; however, geographical education lacks proper funding. The No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) recognizes geography as a “core 

academic subject,” but it remains the only core subject that never received any funding authorizations or 

appropriations.xi,xii Therefore, it is not surprising that in 2010, the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress rated only 21% of 12th graders proficient or better in geography education.xiii 

Students are not the only group that needs geospatial education or improvement. A National Geographic 

survey of educators found that 7 of 10 believed their professional development opportunities in geography

were inadequate.xiv Without proper funding for geography at elementary and secondary levels, both students 

and teachers are unaware of the various career opportunities in the geospatial industry. The U.S. News and 

World Report is a well-known source on university ranking that many students use when evaluating schools

and programs. The Report does not list geography or geospatial sciences when rating degrees for Masters’ 

programs, further exemplifying the public’s lack of awareness on the subject of geospatial sciences.xv

While the aforementioned NSF and NOAA programs benefit the advancement of geospatial technology, these 

programs are also underfunded. Only 12-15% of applicants receive grants through the NSF’s GSS Program 

due to the sheer volume of qualified applicants.xvi The CREST Center is funded through a single five-year grant 

from NOAA’s Office of Education’ Educational Partnership Program, which expired in September 2011.xvii 

Without federal support for geography and geospatial technology education for both students and teachers, 

serious shortfalls will exist in the geospatial workforce in the coming years. 

Emerging Opportunities 

There are not-for-profit organizations that support STEM education inclusive of geography and geospatial 

curricula, tools, materials, and technology. TERC, an education research organization with a broad definition 

of STEM, offers professional development training, curricula, and materials in support of geography and 

geospatial technology as well as other STEM disciplines. 

Recently, The National Science Foundation awarded a 2.2 million dollar grant to National Geographic, the 

National Council for Geographic Education (NCGE), the Association of American Geographers (AAG), and the 

American Geographical Society to collaboratively develop a “Roadmap to Implement 21st Century Geographic 

Education.” The project will bring together industry experts, educators, and researchers to focus on 

improving geography education including instructional materials, teacher professional development, 

research, and assessment. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 7 

Active Organizations and Their Focus 

The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is an advisory group of the nation’s 

leading scientists and engineers who directly advise the President and the Executive Office of the President. 

PCAST makes policy recommendations in the many areas where understanding of science, technology, and 

innovation is key to strengthening our economy and forming policy that works for the American people. 

PCAST is administered by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). In September 2010, PCAST 

released a plan for improvements in K-12 STEM Education.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast

TERC is a not-for-profit education research and development organization dedicated to improving 

mathematics, science, and technology teaching and learning. Founded in 1965, TERC works at the 

frontiers of theory and practice to enhance instruction through teacher professional development, 

develop applications of new technologies to education, create curricula and other products, and support 

reform in both school and informal settings. STEM education and professional development for 

teachers is a core mission area. Geography and geospatial topics are included as part of their 

professional development, curricula, and materials. 

http://www.terc.edu/

The STEM Coalition represents the broadest voice in advocating for policies to improve STEM education at all 

levels. The alliance of more than 500 business, professional, and education organizations works aggressively 

to raise awareness in Congress, the Administration, and other organizations about the critical role that STEM 

education plays in enabling the U.S. to remain the economic and technological leader of the global 

marketplace. The Coalition supports an inclusive definition of the term “STEM” education by federal 

programs that is not limited to math and science, but embraces each STEM discipline and its unique needs. 

www.stemedcoalition.org

The National Council for Geographic Education is a non-profit organization, chartered in 1915 to enhance 

the status and quality of geography teaching and learning. NCGE supports geography teaching at all levels 

from kindergarten through university. Activities include conducting and gathering research, producing 

journals and other geography publications, developing curricular resources at the K-12 and university levels, 

providing professional development opportunities, and organizing an annual conference.

http://www.ncge.org/

Recommendations 

The NGAC recommends that FGDC engage the Federal Government to include geospatial and geomatics 

studies in STEM programs through the following actions: 

1.1 The FGDC leadership should work with and encourage CoSTEM to include geospatial technology and 

geomatics as components of the STEM disciplines. 

1.2 The FGDC Secretariat and agency members should review and comment on the results of the 

CoSTEM Inventory of Federal STEM Programs and the CoSTEM Report on Federal Coordination. 

1.3 The FGDC leadership should encourage awareness among FGDC member agencies regarding the 

importance of opportunities for geospatial technology related grants, such as the NSF’s Geography 

and Spatial Sciences Program and NOAA’s Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and Technology 

Center. Consider inviting NSF and NOAA to brief FGDC on how this model may be applied at other 

departments and agencies. 

1.4 The FGDC leadership should encourage FGDC member agencies to establish internship, fellowship 

programs, cooperative education, or exchange programs that give students practical understanding 

and real-world experience with geospatial technology and applications. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 8 

1.5 The FGDC leadership should encourage FGDC member agencies to support geographic literacy 

through their respective education and outreach programs. 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links 

i

 “Why STEM?” Change the Equation. 2011. <http://www.changetheequation.org/why/why-stem/>. 

ii “NSTC Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education.” OSTP. 2011. 

<http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc/committees/costem>. 

iii “Geography and Spatial Sciences (GSS).” National Science Foundation. 2011. 

<http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5410>. 

iv “CREST Research Overview.” NOAA-CREST. 2010. <http://crest.ccny.cuny.edu/research/>. 

v

 “Improving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education. U.S. Department of 

Education. 14 February 2011. 

<http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget12/crosscuttingissues/stemed.pdf>. 

vi“Prepare and Inspire: K-12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) for America’s 

Future.” President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. September 2010. 

<http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf>. 

vii “Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related 

Trends.” Government Accountability Office. October 2005. <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06114.pdf>. 

viii “STEM-Designated Degree Program List.” Department of Homeland Security. 2008. 

<http://www.ice.gov/sevis/stemlist.htm>. 

ix“Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related 

Trends.” Government Accountability Office. October 2005. <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06114.pdf>. 

x

 IBID p. 32-35. 

xi ‘‘No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.’’ Definitions: “Core Academic Subject.” 115 STAT. 1958. 

<http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf>. 

xii “No Core Subject But Geography Left Behind: Program Funding Levels for Core Subjects under NCLB – FY 

2002-2007.” National Geographic. 

<http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foundation/pdf/NCLBAcademicAppropriations.pdf>. 

xiii “Geography 2010: National Assessment of Education Progress at Grades 4, 8, and 12.” National Center for 

Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. July 2011. 

<http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2010/2011467.pdf>. 

xiv “Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.” H.R. 885. Rep. Chris Van Hollen. 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2011); 

“Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.” S.434. Sen. Thad Cochran. 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2011) 

xv “Education: Grad Schools.” U.S. News and World Report. <http://gradschools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools>. 

xvi Phone discussion with a director for the GSS Program. 

xvii “NOAA-CREST Center Based At CCNY Receives Five-Year, $12.5 Million Funding Commitment.” The City 

College of New York. <http://www1.ccny.cuny.edu/prospective/gsoe/news/noaa-funding.cfm>. 

xviii Jodi Peterson, Associate Director of STEM Coalition, Interview with Tricia Gibbons indicated that the GAO 

will be releasing an updated report in late 2011 or early 2012. 

xix “President Obama Announces Goal of Recruiting 10,000 STEM Teachers Over the Next Two Years.” White 

House. 27 September 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/27/president-obamaannounces-goal-recruiting-10000-stem-teachers-over-next-. 

 Discussions with representative and trainer from TERC 

Press Release: National Science Foundation Funds Experts To Develop Road Map To Implement 21st Century 

Geographic Education, National Geographic Press Office, 6/17/2011 

Coalition of Geospatial Organizations, Resolution on Geospatial Education 

(http://www.urisa.org/files/COGO_Education_Resolution_press_release%2006_02_2010.pdf) 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 9 

Opportunities to Utilize the DOL Geospatial Competency Model 

to Meet Federal/State/Local/Tribal Government Needs 

By: Dave DiSera, Randy Johnson 

Background/Overview 

The shortage of trained geospatial technology professionals reflects a number of issues among the geospatial 

profession and the industries it serves. Among these issues, geospatial technology is used in hundreds of 

fields, but despite its widespread adoption, there is a lack of awareness regarding geospatial technology in 

general and the related career opportunities. As a result, training and educational programs have been 

unable to meet the growing demand within both the public and private sectors. In addition, the skill sets and 

competencies needed to prepare for career opportunities in geospatial technology have not been well 

defined or understood. This has resulted in a lack of consistent curricula, standards, and credentials within 

the profession. A geospatial competency model can provide a common language among employers, 

educators, human resource professionals, and the like to address these issues. 

The goal of a geospatial competency model and the data they provide is to help organizations better prepare 

for the future. If developed properly, a geospatial competency model can become an effective tool for 

performing gap analysis to assist in succession planning, knowledge management and transfer, employee 

development, and work or organizational change. Specific examples include: 

Training and Development 

• Identify existing geospatial competencies 

• Evaluate and assess current employees to determine existence of geospatial competency gaps and 

surpluses 

• Use coaching, mentoring, training, and recruitment methods that match personnel requirements and 

future needs 

• Individual developmental planning 

Workforce Planning 

• Identify current and future human capital needs including workforce size, distribution, and 

competencies needed to achieve the geospatial needs of the organization 

• Redeploy or temporarily rotate staff to fill some of the gaps 

• Reorganizing or restructuring positions or organizations to make better use of existing geospatial 

resources and match skills to functions 

Succession Planning 

• Address skills needed to meet complexities associated with geospatial technology 

• Identify, develop, and select successors who are the right people with the right skills 

• Motivate and retain top geospatial talent 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices 

Department of Labor’s Geospatial Technology Competency Model 

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration (DOLETA) announced the release of 

an industry competency model for geospatial technology in July of 2010. The model is available on the 

Competency Model Clearinghouse available through the department's One-Stop Career Centers website. The 

Geospatial Technology Competency Model (GTCM) was developed to provide an employer-driven 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 10 

framework of the skills needed for success in geospatial technology. The GTCM is a profile of the knowledge, 

skills and abilities required for the worker in the geospatial industry. The GTCM has been in development at 

the DOLETA since 2005, shortly after DOLETA highlighted geospatial technology as a high growth industry, 

along with biotechnology and nontechnology. These industries were also identified as having the greatest 

potential impact on the economy. http://www.careeronestop.org/competencymodel/

DOLETA worked with employer and education partners for two years to develop and validate a model that 

represents the broad range of services, technical and manufacturing professions, and products within the 

fields of geography, surveying and mapping, computer science, information science and other specialized 

areas of application that comprise geospatial technology. The GeoTech Center, a government, academia and 

industry partnership funded, in part, by a grant from the National Science Foundation and based at Del Mar

College, led the validation process. 

The model builds on previous efforts to describe geospatial industry skill needs, including the Geospatial 

Technology Competency Model developed at the University of Southern Mississippi. The new model groups 

competencies into foundational competencies, core geospatial competencies and competencies for three 

geospatial sectors: positioning and data acquisition, analysis and modeling, and software and application 

development. 

The model is currently serving as a resource for career guidance, curriculum development and evaluation, 

career pathway development, recruitment and hiring, continuing professional development, certification and 

assessment development, apprenticeship program development and outreach efforts to promote geospatial 

technology careers. 

Geographic Information Science and Technology BoK2: Foundational Research Project 

The Geographic Information Science and Technology Body of Knowledge (GIST BoK) is a reference 

document produced by the University Consortium for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS) as the first 

product of its Model Curricula project. The GIST BoK is the most successful effort to date to create a 

comprehensive outline of the concepts and skills unique to the geospatial realm, including geographic 

information systems, geographic information science, remote sensing, satellite navigation systems, and 

cartography. It is also missing some topics, such as geocoding, and has significant granularity issues: large, 

mature subfields such as surveying, GPS, and remote sensing are covered in small sections. 

http://www.ucgis.org/priorities/education/modelcurriculaproject.asp

 The follow-on project – called the GIS&T BoK2 -- will enable the maintenance and expansion of the 

knowledge base of GIS&T in a more dynamic, interactive, and collaborative manner than the original project. 

A new environment will be developed to provide for ways of understanding and experiencing the GIS&T Body 

of Knowledge and help to facilitate teaching, research, and professional advancement. Developing a 

common language was recognized early on and the University Consortium for Geographic Information 

Science (UCGIS) led the creation of the GIS&T BoK1. The GIS&T BoK2 project will: 

• Map out the strengths and weakness of the BoK1 and develop a more comprehensive and inclusive 

organizing framework for GIST BoK2 

• Examine a methodology for generating ontology 

• Develop visually interactive representations of the Geographic Information Science and Technology 

knowledge domain 

• Examine and test different environments for realizing the Bok2 

The impact that the BoK1 has helped refocused educational and research activities in the GIS&T sector. The 

GIS&T BoK2 will create a dynamic environment for teaching, knowledge building, dialogue, collaboration, and 

research in GIS&T. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 11 

Project GTCM 

Project GTCM is a national effort to develop curriculum based upon the Department of Labor's Geospatial 

Technology Competency Model by the Geotech Center. The objective of this project to develop a set of 

course pack outlines and assessment tools that allow community college educators to assess their own 

curriculum while developing new material, based upon industry standards. The Center is working to 

complete a "Model Geospatial Certificate" outline of courses and their required and recommended student 

learning outcomes content by late summer of 2012. http://www.geotechcenter.org/Projects/ResearchProjects/Geospatial-Technology-Competency-Model/

Opportunities and Challenges 

Starting are far back as the early 1990’s, many organizations were having discussions about geospatial 

competency development and management within the GIS community. Over the years, many public and 

private organizations have struggled attempting to develop, implement, and effectively using a geospatial 

competency based system within their respective organizations. Understanding why this has happened and 

learning from the challenges of these organizations, is an important part of ensuring the success of the 

DOLETA’s Geospatial Technology Competency Model going forward. While the excitement over the 

Geospatial Technology Competency Model has helped to fuel the sometimes-inflated expectations of its 

promise, there is not a quick and easy fix to the limited geospatial resources and lack of formalized 

competencies across the public and private sectors. The types of challenges that competency models and 

management have solved in other industries have evolved over the years. The complex problems associated 

with the application of geospatial technology don’t have simple answers when you consider the accelerated 

use of geospatial data and technology, the continuing advances in technology, and the limitation of qualified

resources, educational and training programs. 

Before an organization begins looking at how to successfully apply the elements of DOLETA’s Geospatial 

Technology Competency Model and implement a program for internal use, it is necessary for the organization

to consider and build what is needed, use the right tools to make changes easy and dynamic, and respond to 

the organizational changing needs so that the program is both useful and used. Organizations need to 

address several pertinent questions before moving forward on a geospatial competency program initiative.

Question Answer 

Why are we developing a program? To address the business value. 

What will the program be used for? To determine what geospatial lines of business or business 

processes it will support and manage. 

What will the program include? To define what elements are needed to make the program 

work. 

How will the program be created? To identify the process and procedures, and the resources 

necessary to implement and manage the program. 

A successful geospatial competency program initiative will allow an organization to be consistent with what 

you hire geospatial resources for, train them in, what you measure performance against, and develop 

leadership potential. There are also opportunities in addressing the issues of demographics by developing

new leaders, identifying where bench strength is lacking, and dealing with the retirement of experienced 

people in senior level positions. A program will also improve talent retention in today’s highly competitive 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 12 

market, and support employee-owned career development to further their competencies with geospatial 

technology. 

Active Organizations and Their Focus 

The U.S. Department of Labor's Employment and Training Administration has lead development of 16 

models, including the Geospatial Competency Model. These models are available on the Competency Model 

Clearinghouse available through the department's One-Stop Career Centers website. They serve as a 

resource for career guidance, curriculum development and evaluation, career pathway development, 

recruitment and hiring, continuing professional development, certification and assessment development, 

apprenticeship program development and outreach efforts to promote geospatial technology careers. 

ETA worked with Geospatial employers, associations, and education partners for a period of two years to 

research, develop, and validate a model that represents the broad range of services, technical and 

manufacturing professions, and products within the fields of geography, surveying and mapping, computer 

science, information science and other specialized areas of application that comprise geospatial technology. 

The GeoTech Center, a government, academia and industry partnership funded, in part, by a grant from the 

National Science Foundation and based at Del Mar College, led the model validation process. It should be 

noted that the model builds on previous efforts to describe geospatial industry skill needs, including the 

Geospatial Technology Competency Model developed at the University of Southern Mississippi. 

Recommendations 

The NGAC recommends that FGDC begin engaging appropriate federal agencies to identify opportunities to 

utilize the DOL Geospatial Competency Model to meet Federal/State/Local/Tribal government needs, by 

acting on the following: 

2.1 The FDGC should collaborate with UCGIS and AAG to determine if the Body of Knowledge for GI 

Science and Technology’s knowledge areas encompasses the breadth of the geospatial technology 

field from a government perspective. 

• Use the content of the BoK to construct a workforce survey where the current government 

geospatial workforce can validate and prioritize the content of the BoK. 

• Develop/adapt an introductory course or modules that provide the fundamental (core) 

geospatial skills as outlined in the BoK (or subsequent improved version of it) that are 

needed by the mainstream geospatial workforce across the government. 

• Create additional units under existing knowledge areas and create additional knowledge 

areas related to government workforce-driven applications for specific job classifications. 

2.2 The FGDC should work with the geospatial community to develop a communication infrastructure 

and methods to facilitate geospatial information exchange, such as a website and e-mail list to 

facilitate communication. 

• Disseminate current information on professional geospatial development opportunities, 

training materials, tutorials and links to online resources. 

• Provide information about geospatial internship and mentorship opportunities. 

• Participate in and help coordinate GIS awareness events, such as GIS day and GIS education 

conferences. 

2.3 The FGDC Secretariat should follow up with UCGIS and the Department of Labor on the status of 

the partnerships for developing mutual goals and programs to establish a clearinghouse for 

internship, work experience, and service learning programs; and the GeoTech Center on building 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 13 

partnerships for developing a competency model for a program of study that provides 

guidelines for geospatial education programs for Federal government employees. 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links 

Geospatial Technology Competency Model; US Department of Labor Employment and Training Program in 

conjunction with the GeoTech Center, 2010. 

Geographic Information Science and Technology Body of Knowledge; David DiBiase, University Consortium 

for Geographic Information Science, Model Curricula Task Force, Body of Knowledge Advisory Board - 

Association of American Geographers 2006. 

Secrets to Developing a GIS-Skilled Workforce; Lt Col. Mike Wermuth and Lt. Col. Jeth Fogg; January – March 

2006, ESRI ArcUser Online. 

Defining the Components of the Geospatial Workforce—Who Are We?; Dr. Duane F. Marble, Castlereagh 

Enterprises, Inc.; Winter 2005 – 2006, ESRI ArcNew Online. 

Geography Matter, an ESRI White Paper, September 2002. 

Learning to Think Spatially; The National Academies, Report in Brief, July 2005 

Integrating Geographic Information Systems and Remote Sensing for Technical Workshop Training at TwoYear Colleges; National Science Foundation, August 15 and 16 2005 Workshop Outcomes. 

What is GIS: A Profession, Niche, or Tool? Geospatial Information & Technology Association (GITA) White 

Paper; June 2005. 

Geospatial Technology Competency Model 

http://www.careeronestop.org/competencymodel/

Department of Labor Employment and Training Program 

http://www.doleta.gov

UCGIS Geographic Information Science and Technology Body of Knowledge 

http://www.ucgis.org/priorities/education/modelcurriculaproject.asp

GeoTech Center – GTCM Page 

http://www.geotechcenter.org/Projects/Research-Projects/Geospatial-Technology-Competency-Model/ 

United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation 

http://usgif.org/ 

United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation – Accreditation 

http://usgif.org/education/accreditation 

National Geospatial Technology Skills Competition 

http://www.geotechcenter.org/Maps-Competitions/Competitions 

Competency Model Clearinghouse 

http://www.careeronestop.org/competencymodel/default.aspx

Office of Apprenticeship, U.S. Department of Labor 

http://www.doleta.gov/OA/bul05/Bulletin%202005-08%20Occ%20(lms)-Occ-Geospatial%20Specialist.pdf

 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 14 

Updating “Externally” Focused [GIS Themed] SOC Standard Occupational 

Classification Codes and “Internally” Focused Federal Occupational Series 

Classifications 

By: Dave DiSera 

Research Assistance and Contributions by DOI Interns Edgar Pedroza and Chad Rogers 

Background/Overview 

Both the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM) produce occupational classifications which assist in federal, public, and private sector workforce 

development through the development of guidelines which outline general responsibilities, qualifications, 

and characteristics for particular fields of employment. 

Occupational classifications focusing on geospatial workforce positions are found under both the BLS 

Standard Occupational Classifications, as well as under the OPM Federal Occupational Series Codes. The 

categories are as follows: 

• BLS 17-2021 - Cartographers and Photogrammetrists 

• BLS 17-3031 - Surveying and Mapping Technicians 

• OPM GS-1370 - Cartographer 

• OPM GS-1371 - Cartographic Technician 

In an effort to guide recommendations, on behalf of the National Geographic Advisory Committee, regarding 

geospatial workforce development in public and private sector, a comparative analysis of both occupational

codes is suggested to determine opportunities for revision. These revisions would focus on the sector areas 

where the occupational codes may best address recent changes in technology, operations, and current 

geospatial competencies. 

Emerging Trends and Best Practices 

Existing occupation models in geospatial workforce development have relied on pairing positions to the

occupational codes developed by BLS and OPM. Yet, as with many industries that have been impacted by 

advances in technology, workforce activities in the geospatial field have also been transformed by changes in 

technology regarding cartographic functions, operations, and services. Therefore, there is a significant 

opportunity to modernize the schedule of occupational characteristics to address changes in relevant 

technologies. 

Emerging trends in geospatial workforce development have focused on the application of competency 

models as opposed to delineating a finite set of skills that may be performed at each occupational level. This 

has been advanced by the release of the Geospatial Technology Competency Model, developed by the 

Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA). The Geospatial Technology 

Competency Model accounts for all position levels within the geospatial technology sector and pairs each 

with respective competencies. The model provides for competency requirements for personal, academic, 

professional, technical, and managerial positions. The model demonstrates skills, critical work functions, and 

technical content areas respective to each competency level. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 15 

Opportunities and Challenges 

Position classifications often focus on specific skills, some which do not reflect current occupation-specific 

trends in technology. This includes both the BLS Standard Occupational Classifications and the OPM Federal 

Occupation Series Codes. 

To address the changing requirements of the geospatial workforce, in both the public and private sectors, 

revisions to the occupational series codes should be made to reflect advances and changes in technology and

industry practices. 

These changes would reflect professional and technical work in the physical science sector encompassing of 

the cartography related positions under both sets of occupation specifications. With respect to professional 

and technical work, the skills, critical work functions, and technical content areas that may need revision 

include technology oriented services, operations, and functions. Many of these revisions will relate to 

understanding, operating, and managing computer-based Geographic Information Systems. 

BLS Standard Occupational Classifications 

Potential changes or revisions to the BLS Standard Occupational Classifications may include the following: 

17-2021 Cartographers and Photogrammetrists

• Increase the number of illustrative examples to include GIS Technician and GIS related positions. 

17-3031 Surveying and Mapping Technicians

• Indicate there may be distinctions between physical and digital operations. 

• Include provisions noting that surveying, mapping, and analysis functions may occur primarily in 

digital forms. 

OPM Federal Occupational Series Codes 

Potential changes or revisions to the OPM Federal Occupational Series Codes may include the following: 

GS-1370 Cartographer

• Include provision that mapping duties may occur primarily in computer-based GIS environments. 

• Brief description of Geographic Information Systems as related to cartography duties. 

• Include mention of orthographic imagery, aerial imagery, and satellite imagery, LIDAR, and other 

related technologies: 

GS-1371 Cartographic Technician

• Indicate that many operations will occur as computer-based analyses and calculations. 

• Include provisions noting that that many operations will occur in GIS environments. 

Beyond the Standard Occupational Classification Codes and Federal Occupational Series Classifications listed 

above, the Subcommittee recommends that additional analysis be conducted to address additional occupations 

related to Surveying (Geomatics) and Geodesy as a “Phase 2” of this project for potential updates or changes.

Active Organizations and Their Focus Areas 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics at the U.S. Department of Labor sponsors SOC Standard Occupational Codes 

which briefly describe position characteristics, in respect to subject matter, responsibilities, and technical 

involvement. The SOC codes also include illustrative examples of likely positions under the classification, as 

well as the code relation to the SOC Broad Occupation, Minor Group, and Major Group. The SOC codes are 

intended for external use as a tool for position classification, as they do not include grading criteria for

position grades within the federal government. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 16 

The Office of Personnel Management sponsors Federal Occupational Series Classifications which also 

account for position characteristics, in respect to subject matter, responsibilities, and technical involvement. 

The codes also include specifications as to the professional/ technical nature of the classification. 

Respectively, these specifications include grading criteria illustrations and factor level illustrations to 

determine position grades within the federal government. For this reason, Federal Occupational series 

Classifications are intended for internal use within the federal government. 

The Employment and Training Administration at the U.S Department of Labor has developed the Geospatial 

Technology Competency Model. The model seeks to serve as guidance to help determine the responsibilities, 

skills, and technical proficiencies necessary at different grades of employment within the related family of 

geospatial occupations. 

Figure 1 contains a table a comparison of workforce development model characteristics between the 

Standard Occupational Classification Codes, the Federal Occupational Series Classifications, and the 

Geospatial Competency Model. 

Recommendations 

The NGAC recommends that FGDC work with the appropriate organization to update “externally” focused 

[GIS themed] SOC Standard Occupational Classification Codes and “internally” focused Federal Occupational 

Series Classifications, by acting on the following:

3.1 The FGDC should partner with the DOI Office of Human Resources to engage OPM in an effort to 

review, update, and modernize the geospatially-oriented Federal Occupational Series Codes 

(including the Cartography, Cartographic Technician, Surveying [Geomatics] and Geodesy series). 

The revisions to the Federal Occupational Series Codes should incorporate themes and approaches 

from the Geospatial Technology Competency Model. 

3.2 FGDC, DOL, and the Federal human resource management community should collaborate with nonfederal partners to encourage the use and adoption of the Geospatial Technology Competency 

Model and the updated Occupational Classification Codes and Series. 

3.3 FGDC partner agencies should communicate with their academic partners about the revised 

occupational codes and competency model to facilitate development of appropriate training and 

curricula to address emerging geospatial workforce needs. 

Resources Reviewed and Related Links 

Standard Occupational Classification, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

http://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/soc171021.htm

http://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/soc173031.htm

Federal Occupational Series Classifications, U.S. Office of Personnel Management 

http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/gs1300p.pdf

http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/gs1300t.pdf

Qualification Standards, U.S. Office of Personnel Management 

http://www.opm.gov/qualifications/standards/IORs/gs1300/1370.htm

http://www.opm.gov/qualifications/standards/IORs/gs1300/1371.htm

Geospatial Technology Competency Model, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Dept. of Labor 

http://www.careeronestop.org/competencymodel/pyramid.aspx?geo=Y
National Geospatial Advisory Committee

Figure 1. Workforce Development Model Characteristics

Standard Occupational 

Classification Codes,

Bureau of Labor Statistics,

U.S. Department of Labor

Industry Model:

NO

Position Descriptions:

YES

Illustrative [Position] 

Examples:

YES

Qualification Requirements:

NO

Competency Illustrations:

NO

Technical Skill Areas:

NO

Grade Position Examples:

NO

Grade Position 

Responsibilities:

NO

NGAC Workforce Development 

ommittee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) 

Figure 1. Workforce Development Model Characteristics

Federal Occupational Series 

Classifications,

Office of Personnel 

Management

Industry Model:

NO

Position Descriptions:

YES

Illustrative [Position] 

Examples:

YES

Qualification Requirements:

YES

Competency Illustrations:

NO

Technical Skill Areas:

YES

Grade Position Examples:

YES

Grade Position 

Responsibilities:

YES

Geospatial Competency Model,

Employment and Training 

U.S. Department of Labor

Qualification Requirements:

NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

Page 17 

Geospatial Competency Model,

Employment and Training 

Administration,

U.S. Department of Labor

Industry Model:

YES

Position Descriptions:

NO

Illustrative [Position] 

Examples:

NO

Qualification Requirements:

NO

Competency Illustrations:

YES

Technical Skill Areas:

YES

Grade Position Examples:

YES

Grade Position 

Responsibilities:

YES
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 18 

Summary of Recommendations 

The following includes a summary of recommendations from each of the three white papers. 

1. Identify synergies with the Administration’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) 

education initiatives, assess opportunities to incorporate Geospatial and Geomatics education into the four 

STEM categories, and assess potential role/involvement/support from FGDC and NGAC. 

1.1 The FGDC leadership should work with and encourage CoSTEM to include geospatial technology and 

geomatics as components of the STEM disciplines. 

1.2 The FGDC Secretariat and agency members should review and comment on the results of the CoSTEM 

Inventory of Federal STEM Programs and the CoSTEM Report on Federal Coordination. 

1.3 The FGDC leadership should encourage awareness among FGDC member agencies regarding the 

importance of opportunities for geospatial technology related grants, such as the NSF’s Geography and 

Spatial Sciences Program and NOAA’s Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and Technology Center. 

Consider inviting NSF and NOAA to brief FGDC on how this model may be applied at other departments 

and agencies. 

 1.4 The FGDC leadership should encourage FGDC member agencies to establish internship, fellowship 

programs, cooperative education, or exchange programs that give students practical understanding and 

real-world experience with geospatial technology and applications. 

1.5 The FGDC leadership should encourage FGDC member agencies to support geographic literacy through 

their respective education and outreach programs. 

2. Utilize the DOL Geospatial Competency Model to meet Federal/State/Local/Tribal Government needs for 

assisting in succession planning, knowledge management and transfer, employee development, and work 

or organizational change. 

2.1 The FDGC should collaborate with UCGIS and AAG to determine if the Body of Knowledge for GI Science 

and Technology’s knowledge areas encompasses the breadth of the geospatial technology field from a 

government perspective. 

2.2 The FGDC should work with the geospatial community to develop a communication infrastructure and 

methods to facilitate geospatial information exchange, such as a website to improve communication. 

2.3 The FGDC Secretariat should follow up with UCGIS and the Department of Labor on the status of the 

partnerships for developing mutual goals and programs to establish a clearinghouse for internship, work 

experience, and service learning programs; and the GeoTech Center on building partnerships for 

developing a competency model for a program of study that provides guidelines for geospatial education 

programs. 

3. Update externally” focused [GIS themed] SOC Standard Occupational Classification Codes and “Internally” 

focused Federal Occupational Series Classifications. 

3.1 The FGDC should partner with the DOI Office of Human Resources to engage OPM in an effort to review, 

update, and modernize the geospatially-oriented Federal Occupational Series Codes (including the 

Cartography, Cartographic Technician, Surveying and Geodesy series). The revisions to the Federal 

Occupational Series Codes should incorporate themes and approaches from the Competency Model. 

3.2 FGDC, DOL, and the Federal human resource management community should collaborate with nonfederal partners to encourage the use and adoption of the Geospatial Technology Competency Model 

and the updated Occupational Classification Codes and Series. 

3.3 FGDC partner agencies should communicate with their academic partners about the revised occupational 

codes and competency model to facilitate development of appropriate training and curricula to address 

emerging geospatial workforce needs. 
NGAC Workforce Development White Paper 

January 2012 

National Geospatial Advisory Committee (www.fgdc.gov/ngac) Page 19 

 

i

 “Why STEM?” Change the Equation. 2011. <http://www.changetheequation.org/why/why-stem/>. 

ii “NSTC Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education.” OSTP. 2011. 

<http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc/committees/costem>. 

iii “Geography and Spatial Sciences (GSS).” National Science Foundation. 2011. 

<http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5410>. 

iv “CREST Research Overview.” NOAA-CREST. 2010. <http://crest.ccny.cuny.edu/research/>. 

v

 “Improving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education. U.S. Department of Education. 

14 February 2011. <http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget12/crosscuttingissues/stemed.pdf>. 

vi“Prepare and Inspire: K-12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) for America’s 

Future.” President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. September 2010. 

<http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf>. 

vii “Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related Trends.” 

Government Accountability Office. October 2005. <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06114.pdf>. 

viii “STEM-Designated Degree Program List.” Department of Homeland Security. 2008. 

<http://www.ice.gov/sevis/stemlist.htm>. 

ix“Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related Trends.” 

Government Accountability Office. October 2005. <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06114.pdf>. 

x

 IBID p. 32-35. 

xi ‘‘No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.’’ Definitions: “Core Academic Subject.” 115 STAT. 1958. 

<http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf>. 

xii “No Core Subject But Geography Left Behind: Program Funding Levels for Core Subjects under NCLB – FY 2002-

2007.” National Geographic. 

<http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foundation/pdf/NCLBAcademicAppropriations.pdf>. 

xiii“Geography 2010: National Assessment of Education Progress at Grades 4, 8, and 12.” National Center for 

Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. July 2011. 

<http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2010/2011467.pdf>. 

xiv “Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.” H.R. 885. Rep. Chris Van Hollen. 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2011); 

“Teaching Geography is Fundamental Act.” S.434. Sen. Thad Cochran. 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2011) 

xv “Education: Grad Schools.” U.S. News and World Report. <http://gradschools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools>. 

xvi Phone discussion with a director for the GSS Program. 

xvii “NOAA-CREST Center Based At CCNY Receives Five-Year, $12.5 Million Funding Commitment.” The City College 

of New York. <http://www1.ccny.cuny.edu/prospective/gsoe/news/noaa-funding.cfm>.