Full text of DOI:10.1111/0033-0124.00334

Using the Internet to IntegrateThematic and Regional
Approaches in Geographic Education*
Philip E. Steinberg, Andy Walter, and Kathleen Sherman-Morris
Florida State University
Geographers have long debated the superiority of regional versus thematic approaches to geographical analysis and
geographic education. While most acknowledge that these two approaches are complementary, the task of imple-
menting both approaches in a single introductory course remains challenging. “Global Change, Local Places,” an
Internet-based course offered at Florida State University, attempts to fuse thematic and regional approaches using
methodological and pedagogical techniques that emphasize student-centered learning and Internet technologies. Re-
sults of a student survey and analysis of student assignments suggest that this format was successful. Students ex-
pressed a high level of satisfaction with course content, and, although attainment of skills and knowledge was partic-
ularly hard to measure given the structure and goals of the course, students appear to have gained country-specific
knowledge as well as skills in critical analysis using thematic concepts. Key Words: geographic education, global-
ization, Internet, introductory geography, world regional geography.
somewhat short of [a] distinctive geographic fla-
vor” (Fenneman 1919, 8; emphasis in original).
Perhaps the debate’s most contentious mo-
ment occurred with the Hartshorne-Schaefer
debate of the early 1950s. Fred Schaefer (1953)
challenged the then-dominant position of
Richard Hartshorne’s “chorological” (regional-
synthetic) approach and proposed that the
main concern of geographical research should
not be the uniqueness of places, but the gener-
alities of spatial patterns and the laws that gov-
ern them (Hartshorne 1939; Schaefer 1953).
The “space versus place dispute,” as Bunge
(1967, 353) described the debate, flared again
in the early 1980s with Hart’s (1982) treatise in
support of regional geography and critical re-
joinders from Golledge and colleagues (1982)
and Healey (1983), and again in the late 1980s
in the context of the locality studies debate
(Cooke 1987; Smith 1987).
Most geographers, including many who par-
ticipated directly in the debate, have recog-
nized that the regional and thematic ap-
proaches are complementary, and many have
endeavored to affirm this theoretically, meth-
odologically, and pedagogically. It is perhaps
a geographic truism that phenomena that
distribute across space shape the character of
Thematic vs. Regional Geographies
uppose geography were dead, what
“Swould be left” (Fenneman 1919, 3)? So
begins one of many soul-searching contribu-
tions to a longstanding existential debate within
U.S. geography regarding the discipline’s sub-
ject matter and methodological approach(es).
This debate, which pits a “regional” against a
“thematic”1 approach to geographical analysis,
waxed and waned during the twentieth century
and is braided throughout the discipline’s intel-
lectual history.
Within the “regional” approach, geography
is the study of places (or areas or regions) and
the unique synthesis of phenomena that consti-
tutes each individual place. Within the “the-
matic” approach, the essential objective of geo-
graphical analysis is to understand systematic
or general spatial patterns of various phenom-
ena. Nevil Fenneman (1919, 3), who penned
the introspection above, advocated a regional
approach, arguing that true geographical anal-
ysis is “first, last, and always . . . the study of
areas in their compositeness or complexity.”
His assessment of the thematic approach led
him to conclude, “The study of the [spatial]
distribution of any one element by itself falls
* The authors are grateful to Regan Fawley, John Grimes, Rob McGowan, Darren Purcell, and Brian Yates, each of whom helped in developing or
teaching the “Global Change, Local Places” course. Additional assistance was provided by Joe Clark, John Flynn, Gerardo Garcia, and Joanna
Southerland of FSU’s Office of Distributed and Distance Learning, and Peter Dragovitsch of FSU’s Office of Administrative Information Systems.
Thanks also to Jonathan Leib for advice throughout in writing this article.
The Professional Geographer, 54(3) 2002, pages 332–348 © Copyright 2002 by Association of American Geographers.
Initial submission, June 2001; revised submission, January 2002; final acceptance, January 2002.
Published by Blackwell Publishing, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, and 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JF, UK.

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
333
specific places, while, conversely, the processes concerned with the structure and substance of
that arise in these places go on to impact geographic education. This is reflected in the
broader-scale social and physical processes. division of courses within geography curricula,
Massey’s (1984, 1994) work in economic geog- in concerns with the formatting of introduc-
raphy and Cox’s (1993) in urban geography, for tory textbooks, and in the debate that has raged
instance, demonstrate that while places have in geographic education journals such as the
unique dynamics and characteristics, these dy- Journal of Geography and the Journal of Geogra-
namics both reflect the spatial unevenness of phy in Higher Education since the era of Hart-
larger-scale processes and constitute these pro- shorne-Schaefer over how best to teach geog-
cesses. Within geographic education, the Na- raphy. As Halseth and Fondahl (1998) note, if
tional Geography Education Standards Project one believes that the heart of geography lies in
attempts to incorporate both the regional and the study of the region, then geographic educa-
thematic approaches, asserting that while geo- tion should begin with the world regional sur-
graphical analysis is rooted in the study of vey course, followed by more advanced courses
places, geography is an “integrative discipline” on specific regions that detail how a region’s
in which an understanding of place depends various processes intersect in place to forge the
on an understanding of spatial patterns and region’s specific character. If one believes that
processes (Geography Education Standards the heart of geography lies in thematic analysis,
Project 1994).
then the entry point into the discipline should
We connect this debate over the essential na- be a series of thematic courses (“Introduction
ture of geographic inquiry with a parallel ques- to Human Geography,” “Introduction to Phys-
tion regarding geographic education: Should ical Geography”), followed by more advanced,
the focus of an introductory geography course specialized courses (“Economic Geography,”
be an overview of distinct regions or a survey of “Geomorphology,” etc.).
analytical geographic themes? In the remain-
Each approach has its drawbacks. Students
der of this article, we discuss how we attempted who are educated solely through the regional
to achieve thematic-regional fusion in a student- approach probably will amass considerable
centered environment by employing two Inter- knowledge about specific regions of the
net-based devices: on-line, individualized coun- world, but they may lack a conceptual under-
try research, and on-line discussion boards on standing of the “why of where” that enables
which students posted and commented on one them to predict whether—given a set of place
another’s research. In the next section of this characteristics—specific geographic phenom-
article, we review a long-standing debate about ena are likely to occur. They also may fail to
the foundation of geographic education, and understand the underlying dynamics of social
we discuss how others have envisioned a fusion and physical processes that span distinct re-
of the regional and thematic perspectives. Fol- gions. As Murphy (1998, 133) notes in his dis-
lowing this, we outline the “Global Change, cussion of the College Board’s recent decision
Local Places” course. This is followed by a sec- to make the Advanced Placement geography
tion in which we evaluate the course’s success in course be in human rather than world re-
achieving regional-thematic fusion and a sec- gional geography, “Designing an analytically
tion in which we consider how pedagogical grounded human geography course seemed to
tools employed in this Internet-based class be more feasible than a world regional geogra-
could be applied to more traditional classroom phy course, given the challenge of teaching the
settings. In the conclusion, we re-evaluate the latter in a manner that is not encyclopedic.” On
course in light of the ongoing tension between the other hand, students who are educated
regional and thematic geography.
solely through the thematic approach probably
will gain a thorough understanding of specific
geographic processes and distributions, but
they may lack an ability to appreciate the vari-
Debating Geographic Pedagogy
While Neil Smith (1987, 66) finds the “crude ous interrelated factors that give a specific
Hartshornian battle between . . . the unique place its unique character. Throughout this de-
and the general . . . [to be] a thoroughly sterile bate (and, in particular, since the early 1980s),
debate,” it remains a significant issue for those scholars have argued for a middle ground in

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
334
geographic education that incorporates both emphasizes predictive laws rather than regional
thematic and regional knowledge. In practice, characteristics because the “spatial science” ap-
however, this fusion has been difficult to proach is both more technically sound and
achieve, and thus much of the debate has been more interesting to students. Hudman (1972,
characterized by dueling extremes.
520) urged that the transition to thematic per-
Several major shifts in this debate regarding spectives be hastened, noting that thematic ap-
approaches to geographic education have oc- proaches “have been seriously overlooked in
curred since the “Hartshornian battles” of the the teaching of geography,” leaving students
early 1950s. While Hartshorne responded to with the impression that geographic study is
Schaefer’s challenge to the regional approach merely “the accumulation of facts concerning a
with a thorough and sustained rebuttal (Hart- particular region.” This trend in the geo-
shorne 1954, 1955, 1958), by the mid-1960s graphic education literature continued through
the thematic approach, practiced as “spatial sci- the end of the 1970s, as Kracht and Boehm
ence,” had achieved dominant status within the (1980, 104) argued that a curriculum based on a
discipline. The trend within the geographic ed- traditional regional approach does not prepare
ucation literature, however, was for articles students “to understand, cope [with], and help
stressing the regional approach as the pedagog- resolve” emerging social problems. To the ex-
ical core of geography. Writing in the Journal of tent that scholars during the 1970s promoted
Geography during the heyday of spatial science, regional courses at all, they touted the value of
Steinhauser (1967, 350) maintained a Hart- the region as a laboratory for illustrating the
shornian view that teachers and students must thematic concepts that constituted the core of
approach geography as the study of “the facts geographic education (Bacon 1979). In this
of area from the viewpoint of area rather than role, the regional approach “can serve as the
from the viewpoint of phenomena found there.” real world testing ground for theoretic, system-
Likewise, while James (1967) acknowledged atic geography” (Walter and Bernard 1973, 19).
the merits of both regional and thematic geog-
Since the early 1980s, most contributors to
raphy, he insisted that geographic education the geographic education literature have urged
begin with the regional approach. Otherwise, a middle ground, although they have ap-
he argued, students of geography would be- proached that ground from two distinct direc-
come detached from the “world they occupy” tions. Some scholars, following the earlier
and geography would appear as a “hall of mir- works of Walter and Bernard (1973) and Bacon
rors” produced by scientific deductions from (1979), have used the thematic approach as
spatial laws.
their foundation but have suggested that a re-
Two articles published in 1968 signaled a gional component can serve to connect spatial
transition in the geographic education litera- concepts and themes to empirical understand-
ture. While Kostbade (1968, 12) acknowledged ing of actual places. Taaffe (1985) calls for a re-
that the regional approach was useful, he con- vival of the regional concept within a broader
tended that pedagogical approaches to geogra- thematic approach to teaching geography. In a
phy had put “too much emphasis, of an almost refrain of Walter and Bernard’s view of the re-
mystical nature . . . on the regional concept.” As gion as “laboratory,” he (96) argues that spatial
he pointed out, regions by themselves do not “ideas make sense only if applied to a place [or
“explain things.” Expressing similar concerns, region].” Moreover, he observes that teaching
Nostrand (1968) developed a basic model to spatial systems in relation to the region would
serve as a guide to help teachers explain what is lead to a much-needed broadening of perspec-
relevant about regions. Anticipating theoretical tives on spatial models. Extending this latter
developments in the broader intellectual cur- point, DeSouza (1985) argues that the empha-
rent, the model conceptualizes a “monistic” ap- sis on spatial analysis in geographic instruction
proach in which the region is understood as a had, by the mid-1980s, gone too far. As a result,
place produced historically by spatial processes. students were learning of a “skeletal world of
After 1968, there was a decided shift toward areas, points, and lines” (DeSouza, 50) that is
thematic approaches to teaching geography. devoid of the complexities and specificities of
Brown and Hurst (1969) argued that economic social life. In order to bring “the ‘human’ back
geography should be taught in a manner that into geography,” DeSouza (50) proposes a

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
335
structuralist approach that emphasizes the his- haps, are de Blij and Muller (2000), whose text-
torical and geographical interplay between book explicitly uses each region to explicate a
human agency and the social structures that “systematic” subfield of geography (e.g., urban
produce the places in which people live their geography in North America, political geogra-
lives. Among textbooks currently used in U.S. phy in Southeast Asia, etc.). Other regional
introductory geography courses, this approach textbooks, such as those by Pulsipher (2000)
of thematic geography supplemented by re- and Rowntree and colleagues (2000), adopt a
gional studies can be found in Fellman, Getis, template of themes that they apply to each re-
and Getis (1999), in which each chapter focuses gion, thereby imparting to the student a knowl-
on a theme, but also features a number of edge of both regions and themes. Clawson
amply illustrated case studies designed to give (2001) takes a somewhat different tack, framing
the student a sense of how the theme affects his survey of the world’s regions around the
individuals in “real-world” places.
leitmotif of “development,” which, in turn,
A second group of scholars approaches this facilitates discussion of various themes within
middle ground by beginning from the regional the regional portraits.
perspective but urging that it can be made
The most recent phase of the regional-
more insightful by integrating it with the study thematic debate in geographic education in-
of thematic topics. Noting the widespread volves a variety of attempts to implement, rather
“geographic illiteracy” in the United States de- than merely envision, a middle ground through
spite (or perhaps because of ) a pedagogical innovative teaching methods. These include
approach that emphasizes the “mastery of geo- techniques that can be achieved in traditional
graphic information,” Allen (1989, 53) reviews classrooms, such as case-based and primary
a discussion paper published by the Depart- source research, problem-solving, peer assess-
ment of Education and Science in the United ment, and interactive and cooperative learning
Kingdom. Although this discussion paper rec- (Libbee 1988; Hertzog and Lieble 1996; Grant
ommends that geography be taught through a 1997). A theme of “student-centered” learning
region-by-region approach, it suggests that weaves through each of these attempts, sug-
this pedagogical format be used primarily for gesting that a regional-thematic middle ground
instruction regarding “concepts, principles, can be reached by means of a reconfigured peda-
and models of geographic analysis” rather than gogical model. In contrast to traditional teacher-
instruction on the unique characteristics of in- centered learning, a student-centered model
dividual regions. Likewise, Karan and Mather recasts the instructor-lecturer as a “facilitator”
(1986, 96) insist on an approach that begins and activates the role of the student from a
with the study of familiar regions but makes passive listener to an engaged investigator,
substantial use of spatial “patterns, processes, interpreter, and evaluator, producing thereby
and behavior in other geographical settings and a model of learning that is “cooperative,” “col-
cultures” to draw out the important features of laborative,” and “interactive.” Hertzog and
those (familiar and unfamiliar) regions. Halseth Lieble compare introductory geography courses
and Fondahl (1998, 336) also express the need in both of these formats and tentatively con-
for regional courses that involve more than a clude that cooperative learning is a more effec-
“synthesis of data about places.” In their dis- tive pedagogical approach and more popular
cussion of curriculum development at a new among students. Grant and Libbee both specif-
university, they (336) examine the merits of ically argue that student-centered learning
various regional course outlines and put forth allows the regional and thematic approaches to
their idea for a “new regional geography” course be integrated into a single course. Grant, in
that emphasizes “recursive relationships be- particular, spells out a “case-method” approach
tween general processes and specific places.”
that, he (181) argues, brings both “territorial
In the U.S., where the world-regions survey knowledges and general principles” into the
course remains the dominant vehicle for intro- geographic learning process. Furthermore,
ductory geographic instruction (Muller 1995), because it compels students to examine and
textbook authors have attempted in various discuss spatial themes in relation to different
ways to integrate the thematic approach within places, the case method develops students’
a world regional framework. Most direct, per- capacities for “independent inquiry and critical

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
336
thinking on geographic issues” by encouraging Change, Local Places” (GCLP),2 an upper-
them to think both spatially and contextually level, distance-learning course offered by the
(Grant, 176). As he notes, “Through the use of Department of Geography at Florida State
multiple cases, students learn how to apply University (FSU).3 The course aimed to pro-
general concepts to the real world and learn to vide an introduction to topics in human geog-
be specific; as a consequence, they become raphy through a sustained focus on the phe-
more tentative about applying generalizations nomenon of “globalization,” defined in the
across the board” (Grant, 176).
course syllabus as “the complex set of processes
Paralleling, but entirely distinct from, this lit- that, on the one hand, are bringing the various
erature on achieving a fusion of the regional and parts of the world closer together but, on the
thematic perspectives, a number of geographers other hand, are exacerbating difference and
have written about the potential for using the conflict among and within local societies.” The
Internet in geographic instruction (Bullard 1998; course was one of two inaugural courses in a
Crampton 1998; Ó Tuathail and McCormack newly formed distance-learning major in Inter-
1998; Wong 1998; Graham and McNeil 1999; disciplinary Social Sciences, which was being
Ludwig 1999; Stainfield et al. 2000; Taylor marketed primarily to students who had ob-
2000). Many scholars writing about the Inter- tained associates’ degrees at Florida commu-
net have noted that it features interactive qual- nity colleges and were now seeking to complete
ities that are conducive to the flexible, self- their final two years on-line. Secondarily, FSU
constructed, self-guided process of student- was also promoting the major to nontraditional
centered learning. Indeed, as Taylor (15) students who had begun their university educa-
observes, the interactivity inherent in Internet tion some time earlier and now were in loca-
usage may suggest “an entirely new paradigm tions or family/medical/occupational situations
of [Internet-based] education, one centered where they could not easily attend traditional
around learners rather than teachers . . . [in classes to complete their degrees. Along with
which] the classroom is the world, the teacher is these students from the major’s target popula-
the facilitator, multimedia predominates over tions, the course’s enrollees also included a few
written texts, and collaborative learning is the traditional students at “nontraditional” loca-
norm.”
tions (e.g., study-abroad centers) and a small
While this idealization of the Internet number of traditional, on-campus students.
should be viewed with a critical eye (Ó Tuathail The course was offered via the Blackboard ed-
and McCormack 1998; Taylor 2000), it points ucation software package.
to the potential contribution that Internet-
Because of the anticipated student base, it
based technologies might make to pedagogical was assumed that most students would have
methods that attempt to integrate the regional had no prior experience with post-secondary-
and thematic approaches to geography. Given level geography, and the course thus was de-
that student-centered learning has been identi- signed to function simultaneously as an intro-
fied as a particularly fruitful pedagogy for achiev- ductory geography course and an upper-level
ing regional-thematic fusion in geographic social science course. In fact, of nineteen stu-
education, and given that the Internet has been dents who responded to the survey discussed
found to be conducive for implementing stu- below, only seven had not taken any geography
dent-centered learning, it follows that a course courses; six students had taken one previous ge-
that extensively utilizes Internet-based tech- ography course, and six had taken more than
nologies could be the ideal vehicle for deliver- one. Of the survey respondents, this was the
ing a student-centered course that bridges the first on-line course for nine, the second for four,
regional-thematic divide. In the remainder of while the remaining six were distance-learning
this article, we discuss our endeavor to meet veterans.
this challenge.
The course was divided into four four-week
units, each of which examined how globaliza-
tion was occurring within a distinct thematic
area of geography: economic geography, envi-
Global Change, Local Places
During the fall 2000 semester, the authors of ronmental geography, cultural geography, and
this article developed and taught “Global political geography. The focus on globalization

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
337
was chosen because, besides linking the four country, it was expected that a substantial
thematic areas, the impact of globalization var- amount of students’ effort in the class would be
ies from place to place. The globalization devoted to “surfing” the Web for country-
theme thus allowed for a curriculum that fused specific information that related to the week’s
the study of themes and contemporary pro- assignment question. The course website in-
cesses with the study of distinct places. The cluded tips and helpful links for conducting
Internet was utilized to implement certain ped- Web-based country research.
agogical devices that facilitated this fusion.
Students posted each of their formal post-
At the beginning of the course, students ings to their group’s Internet-based discussion
were divided into groups of four students. Each board, which was accessible to all members of
student was asked to pick one country to follow the group as well as the instructors. While the
throughout the semester, with the condition instructors e-mailed grades and comments on
that no two students in the same group could each formal posting directly to the posting stu-
write about the same country. Additionally, for dent, students complemented their formal
each unit, one student in each group was desig- postings with “informal postings,” threaded
nated as “discussant.” Since there were four discussions that responded to each other’s
students in each group and four units in the formal and informal postings. The unit’s dis-
course (economic, environmental, cultural, and cussant was charged with reading the other
political geography), each student was to serve students’ formal and informal postings, asking
as discussant for one unit.
follow-up questions, and generating dis-
Each of the four four-week units had a simi- cussion. Nondiscussants in the group had
lar structure. The unit began with an introduc- an incentive to respond to the discussant and
tory Web page (generally about six screens) as participate in discussions, since they would be
well as a RealVideo file that oriented the stu- serving as discussant in another unit and would
dent to the topic in question. Following this in- be dependent on participation from other
troductory page, links for each of the first three members of the group.
weeks of the unit led to assignment pages con-
For the fourth week of each unit, the read-
taining required readings for the week (one or ings were entirely on-line. Descriptive pages
two chapters from the Open University “Shape that synthesized the topics from the previous
of the World” textbook series) and a weekly three weeks of the unit were complemented by
formal posting assignment for the three non- links to external sites that gave contrasting per-
discussants in the group. The formal posting spectives on one or two case studies. Again,
assignments called for students to apply the Unit I (Economic Geography) is represen-
week’s readings to their country. The assign- tative. Building upon readings from the previ-
ment from Week 3 of Unit I (Economic Geog- ous three weeks on topics such as tourism,
raphy) is representative:
labor migration, the rise of multinational cor-
porations, the increased speed of transporta-
tion and communications, and the globaliza-
tion of commodity chains, the on-line readings
focused on two case studies. The first case
study examined the politics of localized con-
sumption amidst the globalization of produc-
tion, with a focus on the campus-based anti-
sweatshop movement. Locally-generated Web
pages explaining the issue were complemented
with links to Web pages by groups ranging
from the UN Research Institute for Social De-
velopment to the National Catholic Reporter and
from the political action organization Global
Exchange to the Nike Corporation. The sec-
Chapters 3 and 5 [the required readings for the
week] both consider how the use (or consump-
tion) of particular spaces for economic purposes
is variously implicated in processes of both eco-
nomic development and social polarization. Chap-
ter 3 relates labor migration to growing urban
inequality while Chapter 5 contemplates the un-
even costs and benefits of tourism to the places
for which travelers are destined. Examine eco-
nomic development and/or social polarization
in your country and discuss how the processes
of labor migration and/or tourism have con-
tributed to social inequality in your country.
(course website)
Because these weekly assignments required ond case study focused on the potentials and
students to integrate thematic material covered limits of ecotourism, with links pointing to Web
in the readings with details specific to their pages of antitourism groups and ecotourism

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
338
promoters. At the end of these pages, the three global change that are occurring in today’s
nondiscussants in each group were asked the world, with an emphasis on how these changes
following questions for their week-four formal are being experienced by individuals and socie-
posting assignment:
ties in specific places.” Because the class goals
focused on critical thinking and research skills
rather than memorization of discrete facts, it
was difficult to accomplish a quantitative evalu-
ation of student skill acquisition. If one is
concerned with “reconstruction” (as were the
authors) rather than “reproduction” of knowl-
edge, the method of assessment should be
qualitative in terms of the “personal meaning”
generated by the students (Entwistle 1987, 50).
Because qualitative assessment is inherently
subjective, we attempted to temper our subjec-
tivity by conducting our qualitative analysis
within a quantitative, and at least partially
objective, framework: the Structure Of the
Learning Outcome (or SOLO) taxonomy de-
veloped by Biggs and Collis (1982). The SOLO
taxonomy is a means of classifying the struc-
tural organization of knowledge based on the
Piagetian notion that learners progress through
stages that become more abstract as cognitive
ability becomes more sophisticated. It charac-
terizes responses at five levels: prestructural,
unistructural, multistructural, relational, and
extended abstract (Biggs and Collis), and nu-
merous researchers have used the taxonomy to
analyze student essays in an attempt to assess
the quality of learning in a class (Boulton-
Lewis 1994; Campbell, Smith, and Brooker
1998; Tynjala 1998; Leung 2000; Whittle,
Morgan, and Maltby 2000).
To determine whether GCLP was indeed
successful in meeting its goals, students’ formal
postings were submitted to analysis using the
SOLO taxonomy. Since the authors did not
have the opportunity to compare the results of
the GCLP class to another class run in a more
traditional way, we subjected postings from
week 3 and week 15 to analysis using the SOLO
taxonomy to assess cumulative progress. Weeks
3 and 15 were chosen since they represented
the first and last typical formal assignments.
In all, 42 postings were analyzed in terms
of their SOLO level, 21 from week 3 and 21
from week 15 (Table 1).4 The rankings for
the two weeks were then compared using the
Mann-Whitney U-test. Although the mean
Given what you know about globalization, eco-
nomic geography, and the specifics of your
country, which would you prioritize as a devel-
opment strategy, Export Processing Zone-based
manufacturing or tourism? How would you
structure the industry that you decide to pro-
mote so as to maximize benefits and minimize
drawbacks? (course website)
Discussants were given a purposely broad
question that would require them to incorpo-
rate material from the nine papers posted dur-
ing the previous three weeks by the three other
members of their group, as well as informal
discussion board postings from the previous
weeks:
How are the three countries of the other mem-
bers of your group responding to an increasingly
“global” economy? (course website)
Each student’s grade was derived from the fol-
lowing formula: 60 percent from the student’s
twelve formal postings as nondiscussant; 25
percent from the student’s one formal posting
as discussant; 6 percent from informal postings
as nondiscussant; 9 percent from informal
postings as discussant.
Thus, the GCLP course used Internet
technology toward the end of producing an
introductory geography course that fused in-
struction about thematic topics with basic
knowledge of at least some of the world’s re-
gions. Our aim was to use the resources of the
Internet to achieve this elusive fusion. Specifi-
cally, we utilized the Internet’s unique proper-
ties to facilitate two pedagogic techniques: the
research capacity of the Web was used to en-
able rapid research on individual countries using
primary source documents; and an Internet-
based electronic bulletin board was used to
host seamless and semi-anonymous exchange
of papers and ideas among students via peer
assessment and nonsupervised discussions.
Evaluation of Achieving
Thematic-Regional Fusion
The course appeared to be a success in meeting rank for week 15 was indeed found to be
its goals, which were stated on the syllabus as higher, this difference was not significant (Z ꢀ
enabling students to interpret “phenomena of ꢁ.595, p ꢀ .55).

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
339
Table 1 SOLOTaxonomy Rankings
Week 3 Week 15
Postings Postings
SOLO Level
General Description
Indicator of Level in GCLP Posting
Prestructural
Irrelevant response, does not
address the question
Does not answer question or writes
only about personal experience
0
0
Unistructural
Multistructural
Relational
Generalizes only in terms of
one aspect, or lists facts
without linking them
Reaches conclusion only through one
point, or lists facts about countries
much like an encyclopedia
3
1
Generalizes through a few
unrelated points
Makes several points to reach a
conclusion, but does not integrate
these points
5
7
Detects and discusses
relationships between
points and how they relate
to central meaning
Uses several different points
together to build and strengthen
argument and discusses
13
11
relationship between them
Extended abstract
Generalizes outside of the
current topic or to a new
area, reaches a higher
level of abstraction
Generalizes outside of student’s
country to other countries,
problems, or other units in the
class
0
2
While these results prevent the authors from ing them to new and different material. In light
offering statistical evidence of an improvement of these drawbacks of the SOLO taxonomy,
in the quality of student response from the be- and considering that it is always difficult to
ginning of the class to the end, one should note identify a statistically significant correlation
the following points. Although the SOLO tax- when n ꢀ 21 for each category, we view our
onomy is an attempt to create an objective finding of a lack of statistically significant
means of assessing qualitative learning, the improvement among students with some skep-
scoring of responses remains essentially subjec- ticism, especially in light of the subjective
tive. Even with the criteria firmly established impression held strongly by students and in-
prior to the scoring process, it was difficult in structors that there was substantial improve-
some instances to distinguish between one ment in the quality of student knowledge and
level and the next. In other instances, postings critical skills as reflected in their postings over
that were included together in the same SOLO the course of the semester (discussed below).
level did appear to be qualitatively different,
To delve further into these questions, we
even though the nature or degree of that differ- complemented our analysis of student postings
ence was not enough to merit placement of the with a survey designed to determine students’
response in the next SOLO level.
attitudes toward the course, its Internet-based
Also, while the SOLO taxonomy may have pedagogical techniques, and the manner in
been the best choice to assess the postings for which it fused studies in regional and thematic
improvement after the fact, the taxonomy is geography. Approximately two weeks before the
best utilized as a means of evaluation when its end of the semester, FSU’s Office of Administra-
objectives are made clear to the students in the tive Information Systems sent an e-mail to all
assignment. In this case, students’ actual post- students enrolled in the class, advising them that
ing grades were based on a different scale that an evaluation website had been created by the
was made available to them on the course web- instructors. Students were asked to go to the
site.5 In addition, since the questions in weeks 3 website, enter a personal key number, and fill
and 15 were not the same, using the same gen- out a survey so that the instructors could gather
eral framework to score each week may not data for an article that they were writing about
have been as valid as if the questions had been the class. The personal key number maintained
the same. However, while asking the same anonymity while barring access to nonstudents
question in weeks 3 and 15 may have offered a and insuring that no student could complete the
better opportunity to gauge student improve- survey more than once. By the end of the semes-
ment for this analysis, realistically, we believed ter, 19 of 27 students actively participating6 in
that the students’ time was better spent expos- the class (70 percent) had completed the survey.7

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
340
Although there may have been a slight bias in lem of lack of attentiveness from her/his teach-
which students responded to the survey, stu- ing assistant, but none mentioned any problems
dents expressed a high level of satisfaction with with the substantive material covered.
the course’s scope and content. Student com-
Given that the most active component of the
plaints about the course focused primarily on course for the students was their writing of the
the workload (Group C in Table 2) and second- formal postings and that these postings in-
arily on structural issues associated with some of volved individual research and writing on their
the pedagogical techniques (Group B in Table personal countries, it is not surprising that the
2), but very few expressed any reservations with student experience centered around research-
the course’s substance (Group A). When asked ing and writing about one’s personal country.
in the free-response section what they liked least Asked to evaluate the statement “I learned a lot
about the class, eleven students mentioned struc- about my personal country” [Q11.1], seventeen
tural issues (e.g., problems with lack of partici- respondents said this statement was very true,
pation in their discussions, little variation in two said it was somewhat true, and none said
assignment questions, lack of communication that it was not at all true. Students’ assertions
with the class as a whole), six mentioned prob- that they learned about thematic issues were al-
lems with the workload (concerning its quantity most as frequent as their assertions that they
and/or difficulty), and one mentioned a prob- learned about their personal country (Table 3).
Table 2 Responses to the Question: “To the ExtentThatYou Did Not LikeThis Class, How Important
Were Each of the Following in MakingThis a Bad Class?”
Very
Somewhat Not atAll
Important
Important
Important
A. Responses concerning substance of class:
“Subject matter was boring or useless” [Q14.8]
“Class tried to cover too much” [Q14.9]
“Class was too specific” [Q14.10]
“I would have learned more about individual places and countries from a class
that focused on teaching about all the places of the world rather than one
that centered around specific topics (e.g., economic geography) and the
phenomenon of globalization” [Q14.11]
0
3
7
3
2
15
10
14
14
2a
2a
2
“I would have learned more about topics like economic geography or
globalization through a class that focused on these topics rather than having
to spend so much time researching one specific country throughout the
semester” [Q14.12]
4
2
5
4
10
AVERAGE SCORES FOR GROUP A (PROBLEMS WITH SUBSTANCE)
12.6
B. Responses concerning structure of class:
“I found Web-based learning to be impersonal” [Q14.1]
“I had to keep track of weekly assignments, which was difficult since there
were no regular class meetings” [Q14.2]
1
3
4
2
14
14
“I found group-based discussions to be frustrating because not all students
participated” [Q14.3]
“Portions of the reading were on-line, and I found it difficult to read text from
the computer screen” [Q14.6]
“Technical problems made the class difficult, and/or the [software] system
was confusing” [Q14.7]
“The [instructors] should have played a stronger role in structuring or leading
discussions on the discussion board” [Q14.13]
5
10
6
4
12
13
4
1
1
5
5
10
5
“There should have been some discussions or interaction that involved the
entire class and not just the few other people in my group” [Q14.15]
AVERAGE SCORES FOR GROUP B (PROBLEMS WITH STRUCTURE)
2
12
10.4
2.6
6
C. Responses concerning the class workload:
“There was too much writing” [Q14.4]
“There was too much reading” [Q14.5]
“The off-line readings (the ‘Shape of the World’ textbook series) were too
difficult” [Q14.14]
7
3
3
7
7
6
5
9
10
AVERAGE SCORES FOR GROUP C (PROBLEMS WITH WORKLOAD)
4.3
6.7
8
a The same two respondents gave strong affirmative responses both to the charge that the class was too broad and to the
charge that it was too specific. This implies that these two students had a general disagreement with the subject matter,
rather than holding a position that the course would have been better if its scope had been either broader or narrower.

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
341
Table 3 Responses to Various Questions about Education inTopical Areas
Very
True
Somewhat Not at
True
AllTrue
Evaluate statement: “I learned a lot about my personal country” [Q11.1]
17
16
2
3
0
0
Evaluate statement: “I learned about the phenomenon of globalization, what’s causing
it, and how it is impacting different places in different ways” [Q11.3]
Evaluate statement: “I learned about the topics of economic, environmental, cultural,
and political geography” [Q11.4]
15
4
0
Although students’ research and writing fo- the high ranking that they gave to the “Shape
cused on country studies and the epiphenom- of the World” series, the most thematic and
ena of globalization, all but two students iden- least regionally-oriented of the various materi-
tified the central focus of the course as als encountered during the course. The read-
thematic, concerning either the four subject- ings from this series were ranked second only
themes of geography or the all-embracing to independent on-line research in importance
topic of globalization. Only two students said for writing formal postings [Q20.1].
that the focus was epiphenomena of globaliza-
Given that the course attempted to combine
tion, and none said that it was a survey of coun- two seemingly disparate ends (a survey of world
tries (Table 4). Likewise, students were asked regions and a survey of geographic themes
how important various subjects covered in the in the context of globalization), we inquired
class were in making the class a positive experi- whether, from the student’s perspective, one of
ence. Although learning about one’s country these ends was seen as interfering with the
and others’ countries were rated highly, learn- other. Survey data reveal that few students per-
ing about forces of globalization was rated even ceived this as a problem, although there was a
higher (Table 5). As one student noted in the little more concern that the regional compo-
free-response section of the survey when asked nent interfered with the thematic than the other
what (s)he most liked about the course:
way around (Table 6). Tellingly, of the four
students who mentioned learning about their
individual countries when answering the free-
response question asking what they liked most
about the course, three stressed that they en-
joyed country research because they found it to
be such an effective route to thematic learning:
The course really stimulated me to think about
issues I had not dealt with before. I gained a bet-
ter understanding of what is going on in the
world economically and politically, and why.
Or, as another student noted:
Great Class, thoroughly enjoyed the experience!
Learned so much about topics I rarely thought
about on such a global level.
It never felt like I was learning “useless” infor-
mation because I chose the country I would re-
search for the semester. I felt I gained a far
greater appreciation for the far reaching effects
of globilization [sic], etc, through the study of a
single nation rather than absorbing statistics and
information about several nations.
The significance given by students to the topi-
cal component of the course is also reflected in
Table 4 Responses to Question Identifying
CentralTheme of Class
I appreciated most the structure of the course.
Specifically, I like the fact that I read material
and then applied it to a specific country. For me
learning is more than reading information . . . it’s
application of that material. By forcing us to ap-
ply the information, not only did we have to un-
derstand it, or come to understand it, we had to
research a part of the world of which (especially
for me) we weren’t particularly knowledgable
[sic]. I learned a tremendous amount, in terms of
both detail and overall concepts. I feel that I also
have a much better understanding of the field of
geography.
Q12: Which of the following would you describe as having
been the central theme of this class?
a. To learn about some of the world’s countries—0
b. To learn about economic, environmental, cultural,
and political geography—4
c. To learn about globalization and its impact on
different places—9
d. To learn about how economic, environmental,
cultural, and political geography intersect in different
places—4
e. To learn about issues associated with globalization,
such as desertification, migration, tourism, financial
integration, etc.—2

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
342
Table 5 Selected Responses to the Question: “To the ExtentThatYou LikedThis Class, How Important
Were Each of the Following in MakingThis a Good Class?”
Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Not at All
Important
Responses Concerning Substance of Class
“I had a chance to learn about pressing global issues and contemporary global
change” [Q13.3]
10
7
2
“I had a chance to learn about various places in the world” [Q13.7]
“I had a chance to find out a lot about one country” [Q13.2]
7
5
12
11
0
3
[I liked most] the interesting perspective created
by studying the same contry [sic] all semester. It
allowed me to focus on the theories and issues
more indepth [sic].
those of the other students in the group, which
were the goals that we had established for the
discussant unit. Responses to questions con-
cerning knowledge gained as discussant were
positive (Table 8), but they were less so than the
responses to questions that inquired about
whether one had learned about one’s own
country, the phenomenon of globalization, or
the discrete topics of economic, environmen-
tal, cultural, and political geography (Table 3).
Likewise, just as the structure whereby each
student concentrated on one specific country
may have limited students’ ability to compare
across countries and identify how global pro-
cesses impacted distinct places, the thematic
division of the course may have limited stu-
dents’ ability to recognize that this division of
human geographic processes into four discrete
areas was merely a heuristic device and that, if
one truly were to understand how globalization
is impacting various parts of the world in dif-
ferent ways, one would need to understand not
only the processes of economic, environmen-
tal, cultural, and political geography, but also
how these four subject areas impact each other.
When asked to evaluate the statement “I
learned about how the four topics . . . impact
each other,” twelve students said that this state-
ment was very true, five said it was somewhat
true, and two said it was not at all true [Q11.5].
These numbers, like those in response to the
While the course generally was successful in
meeting its goals of instruction in thematic and
regional geography so as to generate an inte-
grated understanding of global processes that
operate both across space and in place, there
are areas where it could have been more effec-
tive. One of our concerns in constructing the
course was that students learn about not just
their own personal country but also the coun-
tries of the other three students in their group,
as this would both increase their knowledge of
distinct regions and give them a comparative
perspective from which to understand how
global-scale processes have differential impacts
around the world. Since the unit in which a stu-
dent served as discussant was the one in which
(s)he most directly engaged the other students’
countries and synthesized their experiences, we
were pleased to learn that students found that
the unit in which they served as discussant was
at least as educational as the three units in
which they served as nondiscussant (Table 7).
Despite the relative importance of the discus-
sant units, however, the course was only par-
tially successful in leading students to learn
about countries other than their own and to
make connections between their country and
Table 6 Selected Responses to the Question: “To the ExtentThatYou Did Not LikeThis Class, How
Important Were Each of the Following in MakingThis a Bad Class?”
Very
Important
Somewhat
Important
Not at All
Important
Responses Concerning Dual Agenda of Class
“I would have learned more about individual places and countries from a
class that focused on teaching about all the places of the world rather than
one that centered around specific topics (e.g., economic geography) and
the phenomenon of globalization” [Q14.11]
2
2
14
“I would have learned more about topics like economic geography or
globalization through a class that focused on these topics rather than
having to spend so much time researching one specific country throughout
the semester” [Q14.12]
4
5
10

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
343
Table 7 Responses to Question Regarding
was successful. When asked to consider the sig-
nificance of twelve characteristics of the course
in making it a positive experience, students
gave their second highest over-all ranking to
the fact that the course was centered around
small groups [Q13.6]. Nine students said that
the small group format was very important in
making the course a positive experience, eight
said it was somewhat important, and only two
said that it was not at all important (the only
characteristic that ranked even higher in im-
portance was that the course freed the student
from having to be at a certain place and time
for class sessions). All nineteen students re-
sponded “somewhat true” or “very true” to the
statement: “Discussions with fellow classmates
allowed me to see how other countries also face
the problems/issues facing my country, even if
in different ways” [Q11.8]. This suggests that
the exchange of informal and formal postings
in small groups played a crucial role in expand-
ing students’ expertise beyond their one coun-
try to the other countries being studied in their
group, so that they could make broad-ranging
analyses of globalization and its varying im-
pacts around the world.
These findings lead to the question of
whether small-group interaction would have
been just as effective if the four-student groups
had met in person. Results here are mixed. On
the one hand, students generally reported that
the Internet environment made them feel more
comfortable commenting on their colleagues’
papers and having their colleagues comment-
ing on their papers than would have been the
case in a regular classroom (Table 9). Most stu-
dents also reported that the Internet-based
small-group format allowed for thought-out
responses not possible in spontaneous class-
room conversation [Q13.11] and that the
format created more opportunities for one-
on-one communication between student and in-
structor than would have occurred in a regular
Educational Value of Discussant Role
Q22: Do you feel that you learned more in the unit in which
you were discussant or in the units in which you were
not discussant?
a. I learned much more in the unit in which I was
discussant—4
b. I learned somewhat more in the unit in which I was
discussant—2
c. I learned about the same in all units—10
d. I learned somewhat more in the units in which I was
not discussant—3
e. I learned much more in the units in which I was not
discussant—0
questions about learning about countries be-
sides one’s own (Table 8), are quite high, but
again they are somewhat lower than the re-
sponses given when students were asked
whether they had learned about their personal
country, the individual thematic topics, or the
concept of globalization (Table 3).
Achieving Regional-Thematic Fusion
with and without the Internet
Given the apparent success of the course, two
questions arise regarding its applicability to
non-Internet contexts: Would the techniques
have achieved similar results if employed as
Internet-based supplements to a classroom-
based course; and could they be employed
without any structured use of the Internet at
all? In this section, we briefly consider these
questions with reference to the two ways in
which “Global Change, Local Places” utilized
the Internet: as a forum for small groups to ex-
change and comment on papers, and as a vehi-
cle for conducting country-specific research.
Participation in small groups played a crucial
role in the course. Indeed, from the students’
perspective, the entire course took place within
a group of four students. Survey results reveal
that, in general, this small-group interaction
Table 8 Responses to Questions about Knowledge Gained as Discussant
Very
True
Somewhat
True
Not at
AllTrue
Evaluate statement: “I learned a lot about the countries of the others in my group”
[Q11.2]
Evaluate statement: “Discussions with fellow classmates allowed me to see how
other countries also face the problems/issues facing my country, even if in
different ways” [Q11.8]
7
5
10
14
2
0

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
344
Table 9 Effect of the Internet on Comfort Levels
Much
More in
Internet
Class
Somewhat About the Somewhat
Much
More in
Regular
Class
More in
Internet
Class
Same as in
Regular
Class
More in
Regular
Class
“Compared with a classroom situation, how
comfortable were you about commenting on,
responding to, and critiquing your colleagues’
postings?” [Q2]
6
5
5
2
1
“Compared with a classroom situation, how
comfortable were you with the fact that your
colleagues were reading your postings and, at
times, commenting on and critiquing them?” [Q3]
6
7
5
0
1
classroom [Q13.5]. For each of these features, culture, environment, and economy?) played a
nine students considered the feature very im- crucial role in the course, forming the basis for
portant in making the course a “good experi- weekly nondiscussant formal postings (which,
ence,” six considered it somewhat important, in turn, constituted 60 percent of a student’s
and four said that it was not at all important.
grade). Material for answering such questions
On the other hand, when asked to compare might be found in non-Web sources, but it was
actual levels of participation with that in a tra- assumed that this material would be more ac-
ditional classroom, students’ responses were cessible over the Web, especially in the context
fairly evenly distributed across all possible an- of an Internet-based course wherein students
swers (Table 10). It seems plausible that while were already actively engaged in a computer
the majority of students found the Internet to environment. Internet-based course material
be a “safer” environment than the classroom, provided extensive advice in conducting coun-
for most students the relative “safety” of the try-based Web research and it was anticipated
classroom had little impact on the degree of that this would constitute a large percentage of
participation. This hypothesis is supported by student effort in the course. Not surprisingly,
the small number of students (six out of nine- seventeen of nineteen students reported that
teen) who felt that the relative “safety” of the they could not have composed their formal
Internet played a very important role making postings without the use of independent Web
the class a positive experience [Q13.4].
research (the other two students reported that
Turning to the other use of the Internet, they regularly engaged in independent Web re-
Web-based country research, we see that the search but that material from this research
importance of the Internet again is mixed. In- rarely was incorporated into their postings)
dividual country research in which students [Q20.6]. Surprisingly, however, nine students
used the Web to research specific questions reported that they also could not have writ-
(e.g., how is tourism impacting your country’s ten their formal postings without additional
Table 10 Effect of the Internet on Reported Participation Levels
Much
More in
Internet
Class
Somewhat About the Somewhat
Much
More in
Regular
Class
More in
Internet
Class
Same as in
Regular
Class
More in
Regular
Class
“Overall, do you feel that your level of participation
in the informal postings was higher or lower than
the level of participation that you would have had
in discussions taking place in a regular
classroom?” [Q4]
4
3
5
5
2
“Overall, do you feel that the level of participation by
other members of your group in the informal
postings was higher or lower than the level of
participation that they would have had in
2
6
4
4
3
discussions in a regular classroom?” [Q5]

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
345
Table 11 Responses to the Question: “Which
within it should learn from the historical devel-
opment of their discipline and not “go over-
board [one way or the other] . . . and foreclose
the possibility of a middle ground.” Likewise,
while usually favoring one approach over the
other, most writers on geographic education
have asserted the need to consistently evaluate
the pedagogical contributions of both regional
and thematic geography. As Grant (1997) sug-
gests, for geography students, the route to crit-
ical thinking runs over a middle ground that
blends both space and place. Yet while many
would agree that regional and thematic geogra-
phy are “essentially complementary” ap-
proaches (Libbee 1988, 9), the task of integrat-
of the Following Statements Best DescribesYour
Experience Finding Information aboutYour
Country on the Web?” [Q9]
a. There wasn’t enough English-language information on my
country—1
b. There was plenty of English-language information on my
country, but I had trouble finding material that related to
the topics that I was required to address in my formal
postings—7
c. There seemed to be about the right amount of English-
language information on my country on the Web—10
d. There was too much English-language information on
my country on the Web and I had trouble sorting through
it all—1
off-line research, although this never had been ing them into a single course continues to pose
intended by the instructors. Only five students a challenge for geographic educators.
reported having done no independent research
The need for a new paradigm of geographic
off-line. This suggests that perhaps some stu- education that fuses the thematic with the re-
dents did have trouble finding material relevant gional is particularly evident in the call for a
to some questions on the Web, a finding sup- new area-studies paradigm. Efforts such as the
ported by responses to a question concerning Ford Foundation’s Crossing Borders project
students’ Web research experiences (Table 11). seek to revive area studies by working within
Our findings thus suggest that while the In- the regional geography tradition, recognizing
ternet helped to facilitate individualized stu- that integrative understanding of a place is cru-
dent research projects and small groups in cial for critical analysis of society. At the same
which students exchanged and commented on time, however, this initiative recognizes that
each other’s papers, both of these uses of the the notion of static, self-contained areas is itself
Internet also could have been implemented in a being questioned and, in order to undertake a
traditional classroom setting. Small-group in- new wave of area-studies research and teach-
teraction on the Internet appears to have ing, the regional perspective must be merged
increased student comfort but not student par- with one that focuses on the ongoing processes
ticipation. And while most students found by which individual places (and the connec-
Web-based country research helpful, it also left tions between them) are produced (Ford Foun-
many students still seeking non-Web-based dation 1999).
sources of information. The greatest contribu-
With “Global Change, Local Places,” we
tion of implementing these two Internet-based approached this challenge through an intro-
resources, in the context of an Internet-based ductory geography course, and the survey data
distance-learning course, is that these activities indicate that by most measures the course was
became the course rather than merely becoming successful in meeting its goals. The course built
supplements to classroom activities. However, on the strengths of the regional approach, im-
a creative instructor should be able to adapt el- parting important empirical knowledge about
ements of this course to a classroom context.
specific places to students while also giving
them a sense of how processes converge with
varying effects to construct distinct places. Si-
multaneously, it built on the strengths of the
Conclusion
We conclude this article by revisiting our quest thematic approach, helping students gain an
for an elusive fusion of regional and thematic analytical understanding of some of the core
perspectives in geographical analysis and, more processes that, through their differential im-
specifically, geographic education. When Smith pact on place, shape and continually reshape
(1987, 66) described the regional-thematic de- the world. Finally, the Internet aspect of the class,
bate in geography as “sterile,” he wanted to while not crucial, facilitated our efforts to pro-
make the point that geographers embroiled duce a student-centered learning environment

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
346
ductory human geography through core concepts.
Journal of Geography 78:152–56.
Biggs, John, and Kevin Collis. 1982. Evaluating the
quality of learning: The SOLO Taxonomy. New York:
Academic Press.
Blackboard 5 Learning System. Blackboard Inc.,
Washington, DC.
Boulton-Lewis, Gillian. 1994. Tertiary students’
knowledge of their own learning and a SOLO tax-
onomy. Higher Education 28:387–402.
within which students could meet our ambi-
tious objectives. Our experience with “Global
Change, Local Places” suggests that new in-
structional technologies can be mobilized to
meet an old—but elusive—goal: a comprehen-
sive introductory course wherein students de-
velop a basic knowledge of both regional and
thematic geography. ꢀ
Brown, Robert, and Michael Hurst. 1969. Recent
change in economic geography. Journal of Geogra-
phy 68:41–45.
Bullard, Joanna. 1998. Raising awareness of Local
Agenda 21: The use of Internet resources. Journal
of Geography in Higher Education 22:201–10.
Bunge, William. 1967. Theoretical geography. In In-
troduction to geography: Selected readings, ed. Fred E.
Dohrs and Lawrence Sommers, 346–57. New
York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company.
Campbell, Jennifer, David Smith, and Ross Brooker.
1998. From conception to performance: How un-
dergraduate students conceptualize and construct
essays. Higher Education 36:449–69.
Clawson, David. 2001. World regional geography: A de-
velopment approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pren-
tice Hall.
Cooke, Philip. 1987. Clinical inference and geo-
graphic theory. Antipode 19:407–16.
Cox, Kevin. 1993. The local and the global in the
new urban politics: A critical view. Environment
and Planning A 11:433–48.
Crampton, Jeremy. 1998. A regional geography class
in a distributed learning environment. Journal of
Geography in Higher Education 22:417–23.
de Blij, H. J., and Peter Muller. 2000. Geography:
Realms, regions, and concepts 2000. New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
DeSouza, Anthony. 1985. The incompleteness of
spatial separatism. Journal of Geography 84:50.
Entwistle, Noel. 1987. Understanding classroom learn-
ing. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Notes
1 The “thematic” approach is alternately known as
the “topical” or “systematic” approach. Through-
out this article, we maintain the term “thematic.”
2 This class was in no way associated with the Associ-
ation of American Geographers’ Global Change in
Local Places project, which is known by the same
abbreviation.
3 The syllabus for GCLP is available on the World
Wide Web at http://gea1000-04.fa99.fsu.edu/
syll2000.html (last accessed 29 March 2002).
4 The number of formal postings analyzed in either
week was smaller than the number of students in the
class because, for any given unit, one-quarter of the
students were serving as discussant and were not
submitting regular postings.
5 The grading guide shown to students is available
on the World Wide Web at http://gea1000-04.
fa99.fsu.edu/gradguid.html (last accessed 29 March
2002).
6 Because of administrative difficulties, several stu-
dents who had dropped the course were not re-
moved from the official roster. Nonetheless, these
students effectively were not participating in the
course, and thus the number of actively participat-
ing students (27) is used as the base from which we
calculate the response rate.
7 This survey was administered in addition to the
standard evaluation instrument used for all classes
in Florida’s State University System. For a few ques-
tions, n ꢀ 18 instead of 19 because of incomplete re-
sponses. The entire survey, and a tally of responses,
can be found at http://www.fsu.edu/~geog/phil/
gclpsurvey.html (last accessed 29 March 2002).
Question numbers in brackets refer to questions on
the survey, which may be referenced on the survey
website. All survey data presented in this article are
from this survey, except for the responses to free-
response questions, which are from the statewide
course evaluation instrument.
Fellmann, Jerome, Arthur Getis, and Judith Getis.
1999. Human geography: Landscapes of human activ-
ities. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Fenneman, Nevil. 1919. The circumference of geog-
raphy. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-
phers 9:3–11.
Ford Foundation. 1999. Crossing borders: Revitalizing
area studies. New York: Ford Foundation. http://
www.fordfound.org/publications/recent_articles/
docs/crossingborders.pdf (last accessed 29 March
2002).
Literature Cited
Geography Education Standards Project. 1994. Ge-
ography for life: National geography standards 1994.
Washington, DC: National Geographic Research
and Exploration.
Allen, Rodney. 1989. Discussion of geography from
5 to 16: Curriculum matters #7. Journal of Geogra-
phy 88:53–54.
Golledge, Reginald, Richard Church, Jeffrey Dozier,
Bacon, Robert. 1979. Building a curriculum in intro-

Using the Internet to Integrate Thematic and Regional Approaches
347
John H. Estes, Joel Michaelsen, David S. Simon-
ett, Raymond Smith, Terrence Smith, Alan H.
Strahler, and Waldo R. Tobler. 1982. Commen-
tary on “The highest form of the geographer’s
art.” Annals of the Association of American Geogra-
phers 72:557–58.
Graham, David, and Jane McNeil. 1999. Using the
Internet as part of directed learning in social geog-
raphy: Developing Web pages as an introduction
to local social geography. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education 23:181–94.
Grant, Richard. 1997. A claim for the case method in
the teaching of geography. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education 21:171–85.
Halseth, Greg, and Gail Fondahl. 1998. Re-situating
regional geography in an undergraduate curricu-
lum: An example from a new university. Journal of
Geography in Higher Education 22:335–46.
Hart, John Fraser. 1982. The highest form of the ge-
ographer’s art. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 72:1–29.
Journal of Technology and Design Education 10:149–
61.
Libbee, Michael. 1988. World geography and inter-
national understanding. Journal of Geography 87:
5–10.
Ludwig, Gail. 1999. Virtual geographic research
teams: A case study. Journal of Geography 98:149–
54.
Massey, Doreen. 1984. Spatial divisions of labor. New
York: Methuen.
———. 1994. Space, place, and gender. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Muller, Peter. 1995. The contribution of textbooks
to undergraduate geography instruction in the
USA. Journal of Geography in Higher Education
19:341–43.
Murphy, Alexander B. 1998. Advanced Placement
geography: Opportunities and challenges for ge-
ographers. Journal of Geography 97:132–36.
Nostrand, Richard. 1968. A model for geography.
Journal of Geography 67:13–17.
Hartshorne, Richard. 1939. The nature of geography. Ó Tuathail, Gearóid, and Derek McCormack. 1998.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers
29:1–28.
———. 1954. Comment on “Exceptionalism in
geography.” Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 44:108–9.
———. 1955. “Exceptionalism in geography” re-
examined. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 45:205–44.
———. 1958. The concept of geography as a science
of space, from Kant and Humboldt to Hettner.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers
48:97–108.
Healey, R. G. 1983. Regional geography in the com-
puter age: A further commentary on “The highest
form of a geographer’s art.” Annals of the Association
of American Geographers 73:432–39.
Hertzog, C. Jay, and Charles Lieble. 1996. A study of
two techniques for teaching introductory geog-
raphy: Traditional approach versus cooperative
learning in the university classroom. Journal of
Geography 95:274–80.
The technoliteracy challenge: Teaching globalisa-
tion using the Internet. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education 22:347–61.
Pulsipher, Lydia. 2000. World regional geography.
New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Rowntree, Les, Martin Lewis, Marie Price, and Wil-
liam Wyckoff. 2000. Diversity amid globalization:
World regions, environment, development. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schaefer, Fred. 1953. Exceptionalism in geography:
A methodological examination. Annals of the Asso-
ciation of American Geographers 43:226–49.
Smith, Neil. 1987. Dangers of the empirical turn:
Some comments on the CURS initiative. Antipode
19:59–68.
Stainfield, John, Peter Fisher, Bob Ford, and Michael
Solem. 2000. International virtual field trips: A
new direction? Journal of Geography in Higher Edu-
cation 24:263–70.
Steinhauser, Frederic. 1967. The study of geography.
Journal of Geography 66:350–59.
Hudman, Lloyd. 1972. Geographic concepts: A need
to be explicit. Journal of Geography 71:520–25.
James, Preston. 1967. Introductory geography: Top-
ical or regional. Journal of Geography 66:52–53.
Karan, Pradyumna, and Cotton Mather. 1986. The
trouble with college geography. Journal of Geogra-
phy 85:95–97.
Kostbade, J. 1968. The regional concept and geo-
graphic education. Journal of Geography 67:6–12.
Kracht, James, and Richard Boehm. 1980. Geogra-
phy is more than knowing: Deciding and doing are
basic too! Journal of Geography 79:104–7.
Leung, C. F. 2000. Assessment for learning: Using
SOLO taxonomy to measure design performance
of design and technology students. International
Taaffe, Edward. 1985. Comments on regional geog-
raphy. Journal of Geography 84:96–97.
Taylor, Jonathan. 2000. Using the World Wide Web
in undergraduate geographic education: Poten-
tials and pitfalls. Journal of Geography 99:11–22.
Tynjala, Paivi. 1998. Traditional studying for exami-
nation versus constructivist learning tasks: Do
learning outcomes differ? Studies in Higher Educa-
tion 23:173–88.
Walter, Bob, and Frank Bernard. 1973. A thematic
approach to regional geography. Journal of Geogra-
phy 72:14–24.
Whittle, Jan, Michael Morgan, and John Maltby. 2000.
Higher learning online: Using constructivist prin-
ciples to design effective asynchronous discussion.

Volume 54, Number 3, August 2002
348
In Proceedings of the NAWEB 2000 International Con- ANDY WALTER is a doctoral candidate in the De-
ference on Web-based Learning, 127–41. Fredericton: partment of Geography, Florida State University,
University of New Brunswick.
Tallahassee, FL 32306-2190. E-mail: naw2161@
garnet.acns.fsu.edu. His research interests include
hunger and poverty, the political economy of agro-
food, and labor geography.
Wong, David. 1998. Creating a Web-based elec-
tronic reserve library for teaching world regional
geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Educa-
tion 22:257–62.
PHILIP E. STEINBERG is an Assistant Professor
in the Department of Geography, Florida State Uni-
KATHLEEN SHERMAN-MORRIS is a doctoral
candidate in the Department of Geography, Florida
versity, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2190. E-mail: psteinbe@ State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2190. E-mail:
coss.fsu.edu. His research interests include the polit-
ical geography of spaces of mobility, with an empha-
sis on the world-ocean and cyberspace.
kms3920@garnet.acns.fsu.edu. Her research inter-
ests include hazards, mass media, and environmental
perception.