Vol. 17 No. 2 (2026)
Special Issue: SI_TGEO

From Theory to Practice: Design Principles for Teaching with Earth Observation Data Using the Key Concept “Spatial Patterns”

PDF
Johannes Keller
Institute for Geography & Geocommunication, Research Group for Earth Observation (rgeo), Heidelberg University of Education, Germany
Alexander Siegmund
Institute for Geography & Geocommunication, Research Group for Earth Observation (rgeo), Heidelberg University of Education, Germany | Heidelberg Centre for the Environment (HCE) & Institute of Geography, Heidelberg University, Germany
Expanded Concept Map visualizing spatial relations with the key geographic concept “spatial patterns”. The upper part of the concept map visualizes interrelations between relevant elements. The boxes in the lower part display criteria for the evaluation of the climate adaptation and recreational value of areas. Image: Johannes Keller (CC-BY 4.0)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.j.kel.17.2.065.084
Categories

Published 2026-03-28

Keywords

  • Spatial Thinking Skill,
  • Task Design,
  • Satellite Imagery,
  • Spatial Pattern,
  • Design-Based Research,
  • Geography Education
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Keller, Johannes, and Alexander Siegmund. 2026. “From Theory to Practice: Design Principles for Teaching With Earth Observation Data Using the Key Concept ‘Spatial Patterns’”. European Journal of Geography 17 (2):S.65-S.84. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.j.kel.17.2.065.084.

Copyright (c) 2026 Johannes Keller, Alexander Siegmund

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Received 2025-10-28
Accepted 2026-03-28
Published 2026-03-28

Abstract

Earth Observation (EO) data provide significant opportunities for geography education, enabling students to better understand our changing world. To make this powerful knowledge accessible, the German key geographic concept of “spatial patterns” provides a promising foundation for helping students understand spatial relationships. However, little is known about how to apply this key geographic concept in task design and how students engage with EO data. In addition, the integration of EO data into geography education is often constrained by insufficient teacher expertise. Against this background, the present study employed a Design-Based Research approach to develop empirically grounded design principles that support teachers. To achieve this, the study developed and refined tasks that enabled lower secondary students to engage with EO data. Over three research cycles, both qualitative and quantitative data were collected to examine students’ strategies, challenges, and outcomes. The findings highlight the importance of an analytical framework based on the key concept “spatial patterns” to help students engage with EO data. In addition, targeted prior knowledge and further scaffolding are necessary. Although students were able to analyze EO data and use spatial thinking skills, they continued to face challenges with open-ended tasks and recognizing the limitations of EO data. The study concludes with practical design principles and implementation guidelines to assist teachers in developing learning materials.

Highlights:

  • Even lower secondary students were able to use complex EO data to answer geographic questions.
  • The German key geographic concept “spatial patterns” enables students to analyse EO data in order to understand geographical phenomena and processes.
  • We present empirically grounded design principles for integrating EO data into geography education, which support teachers.
PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Asimakopoulou, P., Nastos, P., Vassilakis, E., Antonarakou, A., Hatzaki, M., Katsigianni, O., Papamatthaiou, M., & Kontoes, C. (2023). Climate Change Education through Earth Observation: An Approach for EO Newcomers in Schools. Sustainability, 15(19), 14454. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914454
  2. Bayarcal, G. C., & Tan, D. A. (2023). Students’ Achievement and Problem-Solving Skills in Mathematics through Open-Ended Approach. American Journal of Educational Research, 11(4), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-11-4-2
  3. Bendl, T., Krajňáková, L., Marada, M., & Řezníčková, D. (2025). Geographical thinking in geography education: a systematic review. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 34(4), 326–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2024.2354097
  4. Bondarenko, O. V. (2025). Teaching geography with GIS: a systematic review, 2010-2024. Science Education Quarterly, 2(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.55056/seq.903
  5. Brod, G. (2021). Generative Learning: Which Strategies for What Age? Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1295–1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9
  6. Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
  7. Chuvieco, E. (2023). Fundamentals of satellite remote sensing: An environmental approach (3rd ed.). CRC Press.
  8. Cowan, J. (2019). The potential of cognitive think-aloud protocols for educational action-research. Active Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417735614
  9. Dannwolf, L., Matusch, T., Keller, J., Redlich, R., & Siegmund, A. (2020). Bringing Earth Observation to Classrooms: The Importance of Out-of-School Learning Places and E-Learning. Remote Sensing, 12(19), 3117. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12193117
  10. Dessen Jankell, L., & Johansson, P. (2023). System Geographical Webbing as an Object of Knowing to Analyze Sustainability Issues in Geography. Zeitschrift für Geographiedidaktik, 50(3), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.18452/25713
  11. DGFG (2024). Bildungsstandards im Fach Geographie für die Allgemeine Hochschulreife. https://storage.e.jimdo.com/file/b2788616-95df-486c-baec-288e61cb67a0/Bildungsstandards%20S%20II%20-%20Finale%20Version%2006.09.2024.pdf
  12. Dorsey, C., Sagrans, J., Yaneva, K., O'Brien, D., Collins, I., Gannon-Slater, N., Jalbert, A., Kastelein, K., Laver, P., Reilly, J., & Schwein, P. (2025). Integrating Data Literacy Into K–12 Education. Harvard Data Science Review, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.24d90bdc
  13. Dziob, D., Krupiński, M., Woźniak, E., & Gabryszewski, R. (2020). Interdisciplinary Teaching Using Satellite Images as a Way to Introduce Remote Sensing in Secondary School. Remote Sensing, 12(18), 2868. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12182868
  14. Easterday, M. W., Rees Lewis, D. G., & Gerber, E. M. (2018). The logic of design research. Learning: Research and Practice, 4(2), 131–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1286367
  15. Eckes, T., & Grotjahn, R. (2006). A closer look at the construct validity of C-tests. Language Testing, 23(3), 290–325. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532206lt330oa
  16. Emilsson, T., & Ode Sang, Å. (2017). Impacts of Climate Change on Urban Areas and Nature-Based Solutions for Adaptation. In N. Kabisch, H. Korn, J. Stadler, & A. Bonn (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Urban Sustainability Transitions. Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas (pp. 15–27). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5_2
  17. Favier, T. T., & van der Schee, J. (2014a). The effects of geography lessons with geospatial technologies on the development of high school students’ relational thinking. Computers & Education, 76, 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.004
  18. Favier, T. T., & van der Schee, J. (2014b). Evaluating Progression in Students’ Relational Thinking While Working on Tasks with Geospatial Technologies. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 4(2), 155–181.
  19. Feulner, B., Hiller, J., & Serwene, P. (2021). Design-Based Research in der Geographiedidaktik: Kernelemente, Verlaufsmodell und forschungsmethodische Besonderheiten anhand vier ausgewählter Forschungsprojekte. EDeR - Educational Design Research, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.5.2.1576
  20. Fögele, J. (2016). From content to concept: Teaching glocal issues with geographical principles. European Journal of Geography, 6(1), 6–18. https://www.eurogeojournal.eu/index.php/egj/article/view/328
  21. Gardent, M., Rabatel, A., Dedieu, J.‑P., & Deline, P. (2014). Multitemporal glacier inventory of the French Alps from the late 1960s to the late 2000s. Global and Planetary Change, 120, 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2014.05.004
  22. Garin, O. (2014). Ceiling Effect. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research (pp. 631–633). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_296
  23. Gebre, E. (2022). Conceptions and perspectives of data literacy in secondary education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(5), 1080–1095. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13246
  24. Gersmehl, P. J., & Gersmehl, C. A. (2006). Wanted: A concise list of neurologically defensible and assessable spatial thinking skills. Research in Geographic Education, 8, 5–38.
  25. Graulich, D., Schärling, R., Kuthe, A., Fiene, C., & Siegmund, A. (2021). Young People and Their (Mis)conceptions on Climate Change Adaptation. In W. Leal Filho, J. Luetz, & D. Ayal (Eds.), Handbook of Climate Change Management. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22759-3_202-1
  26. Gryl, I., Jekel, T., & Vogler, R. (2012). Re-centerig GI in secondary education: Towards a spatial citizenship approach. Catrographica, 47(1), 18–28.
  27. Helfferich, C. (2022). Leitfaden- und Experteninterviews. In N. Baur & J. Blasius (Eds.), Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung (pp. 875–892). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37985-8_55
  28. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Jordan, R., Eberbach, C., & Sinha, S. (2017). Systems learning with a conceptual representation: a quasi-experimental study. Instructional Science, 45(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9392-y
  29. Hodam, H., Rienow, A., & Jürgens, C. (2020). Bringing Earth Observation to Schools with Digital Integrated Learning Environments. Remote Sensing, 12(3), 345. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030345
  30. Hodam, H., Rienow, A., & Juergens, C. (2021). Creating and Testing Explainer Videos for Earth Observation. Remote Sensing, 13(20), 4178. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13204178
  31. Jaeger, A. J. (2024). Google Earth as a Tool for Supporting Geospatial Thinking. Land, 13(12), 2218. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13122218
  32. Jahn, M. (2020). Der potenzielle Beitrag von digitalen Luft- und Satellitenbildern zum systemischen Denken im Rahmen der Bildung für Nachhaltige Entwicklung [Doctoral Dissertation, Heidelberg University of Education]. https://opus.ph-heidelberg.de/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/365/file/Dissertation_Markus_Jahn_2020.pdf
  33. Keller, J., Blersch, M., Plass, C., & Siegmund, A. (2024a). Je grüner, desto besser!? Die Bedeutung von Grünräumen für zukunftsfähige Städte. Praxis Geographie, (4), 22–26.
  34. Keller, J., Heger, J., Petersen, M., Blersch, M., & Siegmund, A. (2024b). Einfluss von Alter, Anzahl mobiler Endgeräte und Festlegung der Interaktionsräume auf die intrinsische Motivation bei App-gestützten Exkursionen mit Satellitenbildern. GW-Unterricht, 176(4), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1553/gw-unterricht176s35
  35. Keller, J., & Siegmund, A. (2026). Nutzung digitaler Geomedien im Kontext des geographischen Basiskonzepts „Raummuster (im Wandel)“: Entwicklung erster Designprinzipien. EDeR. Educational Design Research, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.10.1.2370
  36. Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2022). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung (5th ed.). Grundlagentexte Methoden. Beltz Juventa.
  37. Leighton, J. P. (2024). Freedom to think aloud. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1518075
  38. Lindner, C., Rienow, A., Otto, K.-H., & Juergens, C. (2022). Development of an App and Teaching Concept for Implementation of Hyperspectral Remote Sensing Data into School Lessons Using Augmented Reality. Remote Sensing, 14(3), 791. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14030791
  39. Mašterová, V. (2023). Learning and teaching through inquiry with geospatial technologies: a systematic review. European Journal of Geography, 14(3), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.v.mas.14.3.042.054
  40. Maude, A. (2016). What might powerful geographical knowledge look like? Geography, 101(2), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167487.2016.12093987
  41. Metoyer, S., & Bednarz, R. (2017). Spatial Thinking Assists Geographic Thinking: Evidence from a Study Exploring the Effects of Geospatial Technology. Journal of Geography, 116(1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2016.1175495
  42. Morgan, D. (1997). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984287
  43. Obczovsky, M., Bernsteiner, A., Haagen‐Schützenhöfer, C., & Schubatzky, T. (2024). Systematizing Decisions in Design‐Based Research: From Theory to Design. Science Education, 109(2), 523–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21915
  44. Ortwein, A., Graw, V., Heinemann, S., Henning, T., Schultz, J., Selg, F., Staar, K., & Rienow, A. (2017). Earth observation from the ISS in classrooms: From E-Learning to M-Learning. European Journal of Geography, 8(3). https://eurogeojournal.eu/index.php/egj/article/view/300
  45. Peter, C., & Sprenger, S. (2022). Digitalization and Geography Education a Curriculum Analysis. Erdkunde, 76(1), 3–12. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27163431
  46. Petersen, M., Bergmann, C., Roden, P., & Nüsser, M. (2021). Contextualizing land‐use and land‐cover change with local knowledge: A case study from Pokot Central, Kenya. Land Degradation & Development, 32(10), 2992–3007. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3961
  47. Pilato, J., Peterson, E. G., & Anderson, A. (2023). Spatial thinking activities in PK-12 classrooms: Predictors of teachers’ activity use and a framework for classifying activity types. Teaching and Teacher Education, 132, 104226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104226
  48. Pivarníková, V. (2025). Utilisation of Concept Maps in Geography Education Research: A Systematic Review. European Journal of Geography, 16(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.v.piv.16.2.169.183
  49. Pottier, P., Hardouin, J.‑B., Hodges, B. D., Pistorius, M.‑A., Connault, J., Durant, C., Clairand, R., Sebille, V., Barrier, J.‑H., & Planchon, B. (2010). Exploring how students think: A new method combining think-aloud and concept mapping protocols. Medical Education, 44(9), 926–935. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03748.x
  50. Praetorius, A.-K., Klieme, E., Herbert, B., & Pinger, P. (2018). Generic dimensions of teaching quality: the German framework of Three Basic Dimensions. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 50(3), 407–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4
  51. Reiss, K., Weis, M., Klieme, E., & Köller, O. (2019). PISA 2018. Grundbildung im internationalen Vergleich. Waxmann. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:18315
  52. Riegel, U., & Rothgangel, M. (2025). Beyond fragmentation in subject didactics and curriculum studies: consensus and contention in research designs. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 57(5), 620–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2025.2562531
  53. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
  54. Schulman, K., Fuchs, S., Hämmerle, M., Kisser, T., Laštovička, J., Notter, N., Stych,P., Väljataga, T., Siegmund, A. (2021). Training teachers to use remote sensing: The YCHANGE project. Review of International Geographical Education (RIGEO), 11(2), 372-409. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.708754
  55. Seidel, T., Blomberg, G., & Renkl, A. (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.004
  56. Serwene, P. (2023). Geographie verstehen durch Zweisprachigkeit: Eine Design-Based-Research-Studie im bilingualen Geographieunterricht am Beispiel des Fachkonzepts Wandel [Doctoral Dissertation, Universität Potsdam]. Universitätsverlag. https://doi.org/10.25932/publishup-57848
  57. Serwene, P., Hiller, J., & Feulner, B. (2024). Theory genesis in the design-based research process – a subject didactic view on theory application, verification and development by using design principles. EDeR. Educational Design Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.15460/eder.8.1.2128
  58. Simerská, D. (2023). The importance of remote sensing in geography education. Geografie, 128(4), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie.2023.015
  59. Sullivan, P., Knott, L., & Yang, Y. (2015). The Relationships Between Task Design, Anticipated Pedagogies, and Student Learning. In A. Watson & M. Ohtani (Eds.), New ICMI Study Series. Task Design In Mathematics Education (pp. 83–114). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2_3
  60. Svatonova, H., & Kolejka, J. (2017). Comparative Research of Visual Interpretation of Aerial Images and Topographic Maps for Unskilled Users: Searching for Objects Important for Decision-Making in Crisis Situations. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 6(8), 231. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6080231
  61. Taylor, L. (2008). Key concepts and medium term planning. Teaching Geography, 2, 50–54.
  62. Uhlenwinkel, A. (2013). Spatial thinking or thinking geographically? On the importance of avoiding maps without meaning. In T. Jekel, A. Car, J. Strobl, & G. Griesebner (Eds.), GI_Forum 2013: Creating the GISociety: Conference proceedings (pp. 294–305). Wichmann. https://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa500e_0x002e6e6d
  63. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & Croock, M. B. M. de (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504993
  64. Wabnitz, M. (2019). Blickbewegungen beim Lesen von Satellitenbildern: Eine vergleichende Studie zur visuellen Wahrnehmung zwischen Schülern der Sekundarstufe I und Experten [Doctoral Dissertation, Heidelberg University of Education]. https://opus.ph-heidelberg.de/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/343/file/Dissertation_Eyetracking_Wabnitz.pdf
  65. Wilde, M., Bätz, K., Kovaleva, A., & Urhahne, D. (2009). Überprüfung einer Kurzskala intrinsischer Motivation. Zeitschrift Für Didaktik Der Naturwissenschaften, 15, 31–45.
  66. Wolcott, M. D., & Lobczowski, N. G. (2021). Using cognitive interviews and think-aloud protocols to understand thought processes. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching & Learning, 13(2), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2020.09.005