Lab 4 Assignment

My ArcMap experience was very positive, especially on my third time completing the tutorial. Initially, I found the program confusing and it was tedious to complete the entire tutorial. The third time completing the tutorial, however, went much more quickly, and I made fewer errors and more thoroughly understood what exactly I was doing. I began to understand how I could apply the techniques used to future mapping exercises.

The tutorial helped me to understand the enormous potential of ArcGIS. It can model future geographical plans, show how noise affects a spatial area, predict the outcomes of various policies, etc. It can easily zoom in and zoom out of maps, show various layers of a map, automatically create legends and scales, and can even graph data. It is also very visually appealing—background colors can be used, shadows can be added to maps, fonts can be changed, and items and features can easily be moved around on the map.

The numerous functions of ArcMap lead to an infinite number of different types of maps, graphs, and layouts that are possible; however, this can also lead to confusion and a lack of a standardized and regulated way to map—a pitfall of ArcGIS. In other words, sometimes there can be too many options. If all maps aren’t made in a structured and regulated way, it might be hard to draw comparisons between maps. It can be overwhelming to decide a certain color, line, shape, or chart when there are so many to choose from. In addition, since ArcMap is a computer program, it is destined to crash and for work to be lost.

Overall, I believe the potential of ArcGIS far outweighs the pitfalls. My ability to quickly pick up on simple ArcGIS techniques after only three tutorial trials shows that it is a fairly straightforward and easy-to-understand program. As long as there are guidelines and rules for professional maps, ArcGIS will serve as an excellent tool for graphing and mapping in the future, just as it does today.