Skip to main content

GEOS 428 — GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS II

CIM Verified
Military Science
1
Objectives
10
Matches
0
Reviewed
12
Occupations
Your experience with this course
Top occupation matches for this course
36.4% Art Therapists 6t
41.4% Film and Video Editors 6t
40.6% Graphic Designers 6t
37.4% Architectural and Civil Drafters 6t
39.1% Set and Exhibit Designers 5t

Learning Objectives & Matches

LO1 CIM

1.Demonstrate mastery of topological editing

10 O*NET task matches
Batch:
Video Game Designers 3.6/5
46% ok

Collaborate with artists to achieve appropriate visual style.

Desktop Publishers 3.9/5
42% ok

Edit graphics and photos, using pixel or bitmap editing, airbrushing, masking, or image retouching.

Editors 4.0/5
42% ok

Review and approve proofs submitted by composing room prior to publication production.

Film and Video Editors 4.1/5
41% ok

Manipulate plot, score, sound, and graphics to make the parts into a continuous whole, working closely with people in audio, visual, music, optical, or special effects departments.

Film and Video Editors 4.6/5
41% ok

Edit films and videotapes to insert music, dialogue, and sound effects, to arrange films into sequences, and to correct errors, using editing equipment.

Computer Numerically Controlle 3.8/5
41% ok

Prepare geometric layouts from graphic displays, using computer-assisted drafting software or drafting instruments and graph paper.

Graphic Designers 4.0/5
41% ok

Prepare illustrations or rough sketches of material, discussing them with clients or supervisors and making necessary changes.

Art, Drama, and Music Teachers 4.7/5
40% ok

Explain and demonstrate artistic techniques.

Jewelers and Precious Stone an 3.6/5
40% ok

Pierce and cut open designs in ornamentation, using hand drills and scroll saws.

Music Directors and Composers 3.5/5
40% ok

Arrange music composed by others, changing the music to achieve desired effects.

Source: Course learning outcomes from EWU's official Course Inventory Management (CIM) system. O*NET task matches are computed by comparing each learning outcome statement against every O*NET task statement using sentence-embedding similarity; faculty review confirms which matches count as preparation evidence.