Goodchild begins by introducing the tool vs. science debate, but moves in a different direction than Wright, examining professional opinions: the result of conferences and symposiums among the top players in GI Science. I find this less accessible than Wright’s synopsis of the GIS L listserver, but Goodchild’s examination of the progress of GI Science at a professional level is perhaps a better indicator of the direction of the field. Goodchild focuses on the evolution and definition of the term GI Science. Goodchild describes GI Science as “the basic research field that seeks to redefine geographic concepts and their use in the context of Geographic Information Systems” (2010: 6). I find this definition supports the idea that GIS is more than a tool without overstepping the scope of GIS. The proposed conceptual framework for GIScience further cements the field as a legitimate science with its own boundaries and methodologies.
Smitty_1