Prepared by Dr. Shahabuddin Amerudin
The GIS Training Camp 2 (SBEG3542) serves as an integral part of the curriculum, providing students with practical exposure to geospatial technologies and real-world data collection methodologies. This mid-training feedback survey aimed to assess participants’ experiences, challenges, and overall satisfaction with the program. The results provide valuable insights into various aspects, including conceptual understanding, field data collection experiences, teamwork dynamics, technical challenges, facilities and logistical support, and overall learning effectiveness.
Understanding of GIS Concepts and Application of Software
A critical component of the training camp is the application of GIS concepts through hands-on software use. The majority of participants rated their understanding of GIS as satisfactory, with most responses scoring a 4 or 5 on a scale of 1 to 5. This suggests that students have gained substantial knowledge of geospatial analysis techniques, spatial data management, and map-based decision-making. One respondent stated, “The training helped me grasp how GIS works in real-world applications, especially in environmental mapping.” This indicates that the course structure effectively bridges theoretical knowledge with practical applications.
However, some students expressed concerns regarding the complexity of advanced GIS techniques and the steep learning curve of certain software tools. A few respondents noted that they struggled with data processing workflows, particularly in integrating various data formats and ensuring spatial accuracy. One student mentioned, “The data processing steps were overwhelming, and I needed more guidance on spatial analysis techniques.” This suggests a need for additional tutorial sessions or structured troubleshooting sessions to ensure all participants can effectively apply GIS tools without confusion.
Field Data Collection Experience in UTM Recreational Forest
Fieldwork is a crucial aspect of GIS training, providing students with hands-on experience in data collection, spatial accuracy validation, and real-world geospatial problem-solving. The feedback revealed that the majority of students found the fieldwork engaging and educational, with many highlighting the value of using GPS devices, drones, and field mapping tools. One respondent stated, “Collecting real-time data using GPS devices helped me understand the practical limitations of spatial accuracy.” This indicates that field exposure significantly enhanced students’ awareness of data quality challenges.
Nevertheless, several technical and logistical challenges were identified during fieldwork sessions. Some students encountered difficulties related to equipment functionality, as a few GPS units and drones reportedly malfunctioned, causing disruptions in data collection. One respondent expressed frustration, saying, “Our GPS device kept losing signal, making it difficult to ensure data accuracy.” Additionally, time constraints and field site accessibility issueswere mentioned as factors that hindered the smooth execution of data collection tasks.
Given these challenges, a pre-fieldwork briefing on troubleshooting equipment issues and more flexible data collection schedules could enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of field sessions. Moreover, ensuring all equipment is well-calibrated before field deployment could minimize unexpected disruptions.
Teamwork, Collaboration, and Project Progress
Collaboration is essential in any GIS-related project, as successful spatial analysis often requires team coordination, data-sharing strategies, and synchronized efforts. The survey results indicate that while most students reported positive teamwork experiences, a notable percentage faced difficulties in task delegation and communication. Some groups encountered coordination problems due to unclear role assignments, leading to overlapping efforts or incomplete tasks. One participant noted, “There was confusion in our group about who was responsible for data processing, which led to delays in our project timeline.”
Additionally, several respondents pointed out that differences in technical proficiency within teams created disparities in workload distribution. While some members were proficient in GIS software, others struggled, leading to an imbalance in contributions. One student mentioned, “Some team members are more experienced with GIS, and they end up doing most of the work while others are left behind.” This highlights the importance of structured peer-learning activities and guidance from facilitators to ensure all members contribute effectively.
To improve teamwork dynamics, implementing regular progress meetings and structured task delegation systems could be beneficial. Assigning specific roles (e.g., field data collector, data processor, report writer) with clear responsibilities could help streamline efforts and ensure equal participation from all members.
Technical Challenges and Data Processing Difficulties
Data processing and analysis are core aspects of GIS training, requiring proficiency in spatial data manipulation, geoprocessing, and visualization techniques. While some students found the technical aspects manageable, others encountered challenges in handling large datasets, ensuring spatial accuracy, and performing advanced spatial analysis. One respondent shared, “I struggled with integrating multiple data sources and ensuring projections were correctly aligned.” This suggests that some students require additional guidance on coordinate reference systems and data standardization.
Furthermore, software-related issues, such as crashes and slow processing speeds, were frequently mentioned. These technical disruptions negatively impacted workflow efficiency. One student commented, “Some GIS software crashed multiple times when processing large datasets, which was frustrating.” Addressing this challenge may require optimizing lab computer configurations or providing alternative software solutions that can handle large-scale spatial analysis more efficiently.
Quality of Facilities and Support from Facilitators
The availability of appropriate facilities and instructor support plays a pivotal role in ensuring a smooth learning experience. Most respondents expressed satisfaction with the GIS lab facilities, including the availability of workstations and software tools. One student remarked, “The lab environment was well-equipped, and we had access to all necessary GIS tools.” However, a few respondents pointed out that certain computers experienced slow performance, which affected their workflow.
Regarding instructor and facilitator support, most students praised the guidance provided by lecturers and lab assistants. Many found the facilitators approachable and willing to assist with technical difficulties. One student noted, “The instructors were very supportive and provided helpful feedback on our project progress.” However, a few students suggested that more structured one-on-one mentoring sessions would be beneficial, particularly for those struggling with specific GIS tasks.
Overall Experience and Recommendations for Improvement
Overall, the majority of students expressed positive sentiments about their GIS training experience, stating that it provided valuable practical exposure and enhanced their understanding of geospatial analysis. Most respondents rated their overall satisfaction as 4 or 5 out of 5, reflecting a high level of engagement and perceived learning outcomes.
Nevertheless, based on the feedback, several key recommendations for improvement can be identified:
- Enhancing fieldwork efficiency – Ensuring all equipment is tested before field deployment and allowing additional time for data collection to mitigate unexpected issues.
- Providing additional software training – Organizing supplementary workshops on advanced GIS techniques, particularly focusing on spatial data integration and analysis.
- Improving teamwork structure – Implementing clearer role assignments and peer-learning mechanisms to balance workload distribution.
- Optimizing lab facilities – Upgrading lab computers to handle large datasets more effectively and ensuring consistent software performance.
- Expanding facilitator engagement – Offering more personalized mentoring sessions to assist students facing technical difficulties.
By addressing these areas, the GIS Training Camp can further enhance its effectiveness and continue to provide a comprehensive, real-world learning experience for students pursuing careers in geoinformatics and geospatial sciences.
Conclusion
The mid-training feedback for GIS Training Camp 2 highlights both strengths and areas for improvement. While students generally found the experience rewarding and educational, challenges in technical aspects, teamwork, and equipment functionality need to be addressed to optimize future training programs. The suggestions provided in this report aim to refine the training structure, ensuring that students gain maximum value from their participation. By implementing these improvements, the program can reinforce its role in shaping skilled GIS professionals with strong practical expertise in geospatial technologies.