Webb, Robert (2009)
Curriculum mapping of the spatial science program, QUT: What was the cartography journey?
In Proceedings of the Australian Map Circle / Mapping Sciences Institution Australia National Conference 2009.
Mapping Sciences Institute, Australia, Queensland Division, CD Rom, pp.
1-11.
This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/27432/
Copyright 2009 Robert Matthew Webbc
This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu- ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog- nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to [email protected]
Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record (i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub- mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) can be identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear- ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source.
http:// www.mappingsciences.org.au/ conf2009/ conf2009.htm
:
Curriculum Mapping of the Spatial Science Program, QUT:
What was the Cartography Journey?
Mr Robert Webb,
Spatial Science Program Coordinator, School of Urban Development, Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering,
Queensland University of Technology.
Abstract:
There are currently a number of issues of great importance affecting universities and the way in which their programs are now offered. Many issues are largely being driven top-down and impact both at a university-wide and at an individual discipline level. This paper provides a brief history of cartography and digital mapping education at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). It also provides an overview of what is curriculum mapping and presents some interesting findings from the program review process. Further, this review process has triggered discussion and action for the review, mapping and embedding of graduate attributes within the spatial science major program.
Some form of practical based learning is expected in vocationally oriented degrees that lead to professional accreditation and are generally regarded as a good learning exposure. With the restructure of academic programs across the Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering in 2006, spatial science and surveying students now undertake a formal work integrated learning unit. There is little doubt that students acquire the skills of their discipline (mapping science, spatial) by being immersed in the industry culture- learning how to process
information and solve real-world problems within context. The broad theme of where geo-spatial mapping skills are embedded in this broad-based tertiary education course are examined with some focused discussion on the learning objectives, outcomes and examples of some student learning experiences.
Introduction
University course programs are often reviewed and updated to reflect both internal and external criteria and expectations of the course and the important outputs- the graduate attributes. The paper outlines what is curriculum mapping and how a hybridized process model has been applied to the review of the existing course. The intention of curriculum design is discussed with the QUT policy framework of operation with clear reasons for undertaking graduate mapping listed.
To develop an understanding of the background issues, a brief explanation of some history of mapping and cartography related courses taught at the former Qld Institute of Technology (QIT), now known as Qld University of Technology (QUT). In 2006 a major restructure of undergraduate courses was implemented. A model of working is presented and discussed along with a colour enhanced course matrix identifying the themes of the Bachelor of Urban Development (Spatial Science). The journey of the cartography theme/units is briefly explained.
Two significant issues are discussed; some realities of academia work in high education and the Work Integrated Learning (WIL) unit.
What is Curriculum Mapping?
The central element of curriculum mapping is an exercise in which involved staff review the learning outcomes, content, learning activities, and assessment of a given course to identify where and how graduate attributes are taught, practised, and assessed within the course. Often this exercise shows that many graduate attributes are already being developed but not in an explicit way. Therefore, mapping can reveal opportunities for new or better alignment between aspects of course design for the introduction of new learning or assessment activities, and so on, as outlined by the Learning and Teaching group at UNSW (2008).
One of the most common approaches to developing graduate attributes in Australia and internationally is curriculum integration or embedding. This involves facilitating students' development of graduate capabilities within the disciplinary contexts of the courses they undertake as part of their undergraduate university programs.
The organisation framework for considering this approach to review of units, and whole course programs, has been informed by the QUT Teaching Capabilities Framework- a framework to guide and steer the effective development of practice and scholarship surrounding teaching and learning. This framework clarifies the approach to improving teaching for learning and encompasses the scholarship of teaching practice across four dimensions:
• Engaging Learners
• Designing for Learning
• Assessing for Learning
• Managing for Learning (QUT, TALSS 2005)
It is recognised that curriculum mapping and program review processes are most successful when they are based on the particular learning and teaching goals of Faculties. To this extent, curriculum mapping should not be seen as a predetermined process and a so-called “tick-the-box” approach. Identification of graduate attributes as they pertain to courses and discipline specific units, assists University teachers, faculties and schools in planning, implementing, and evaluating curricula, and helps students to know expectations, plan for their own learning and review their progress and achievements. Graduate attributes inform the wider community about the qualities, skills, knowledge and abilities developed by the University's graduates, as outlined by University of Qld, TEDI (2008).
The Curriculum Mapping Process Adopted
The process undertaken on the specific Spatial Science program review at QUT was a hybridized model between the University of Qld – mapping and embedding graduate attributes approach; University of NSW- curriculum mapping approach, and considering our own QUT teaching and learning frameworks with supportive graduate capabilities resources. The process undertaken involved four sequential segments.
1: Program mapping - What do the learning outcomes and graduate capabilities mean when applied to graduates of the Spatial Science program? This task involves the identification of outcomes and capabilities that the Faculty believes its graduates should or will develop after experiencing the undergraduate program of study in question.
2 Course mapping - How does each of the units within a program support the development of discipline specific graduate attributes? The outcome of the course mapping phase is an overview of how the attributes are evident within the learning activities, and therefore, also in the learning objectives and assessment program. Several thematic layers have been applied to the fundamental course map matrix to determine strengths and/or weakness relating to the theme.
3: Program review - How does the whole program contribute towards the expected graduate capabilities? This task will be undertaken at faculty level by teaching consultants as a means of synthesising the data from the course- mapping segment with comparative judgements against broader teaching and learning directions.
4: Evaluation and revision - How can discipline themes and individual learning units be refined to ensure developmental and sequential support for students to develop program graduate attributes? This segment will involve faculty and school level inputs to analyse the outcomes of the previous three segments with the aim of identifying how individual units (three levels) can be enhanced. This activity may be undertaken periodically on a three to five-year cycle.
Analysis of a completed curriculum map can show gaps where attributes could be embedded or areas of over- concentration where one aspect of the course is responsible for developing several attributes. Not every course can be expected to develop every graduate attribute. Although mapping can be done just for individual units, it is most usefully considered and conducted as part of a program review and revision process. This process begins at the faculty or school level with the translation of university-wide attributes into a set of discipline-specific program attributes. After individual courses have been mapped, the results can be collated, and the attributes can be mapped across the entire program. As ASCD (1999) graphically discussed in their essentials guide, the activity of course/
program mapping can reveal gaps (knowledge, skill, experiences) and/or areas of over-concentration, most likely relating to knowledge and assessment. Analysis of a detailed course map should determine whether the program currently integrates all its specified attributes and outcomes and how effectively it does so.
Curriculum design at QUT has three key characteristics: it is focused on the support of student learning; it embeds real-world learning pedagogies; and reflects a whole of course design.
(a) Curriculum design supports student learning.
QUT courses are designed to support students in achieving the stated learning outcomes desired from the course and to achieve the graduate capabilities that should characterise every QUT graduate group. Throughout the course there will be multiple opportunities for students to master the relevant content, practise the skills and develop the dispositions desired of graduates in that field. There also will be multiple opportunities to track the student’s learning progress, as mastery of the learning outcomes is assessed. To optimise student development, curriculum design incorporates consideration of diverse student needs and student engagement with the learning environment.
(b) Curriculum design embeds real world learning pedagogies
QUT values real-world learning that explicitly reveals for students the practices, culture and practical knowledge of the disciplines and the professions that its students aspire to enter. Curriculum design embeds QUT’s distinctive brand of engagement and real-world learning at every stage of the course. These features include engagement with professions, engagement with research and real-world learning experiences
(c) Whole of course design
Curriculum design is scaffolded to identify and support the developmental levels of learning inherent within a course. To achieve this whole of course design, the curriculum acknowledges the needs of each level of learning and engages students with challenges appropriate to that level, while also building on the previous level and preparing students for the following level.
• In first year, the curriculum is designed to support a relevant intellectual and social transition to tertiary academic study that is not overwhelming to the new learner in the discipline. Support for student learning is particularly important, and the curriculum design should help commencing students develop realistic expectations of learning.
The curriculum design takes a holistic approach that brings together academic, administrative and other support programs. Real-world learning is supported through activities that connect foundational knowledge to the real world practice of the discipline or profession. The expectations and standards of the discipline are clearly outlined so that students can better understand the rationale for the course structure.
• The middle level of a whole of course curriculum introduces increasing opportunities for specialist study and builds on the knowledge foundations laid down in the first year. Real-world learning is further supported through activities that simulate professional work, and provide further opportunities for work-integrated learning through engagement with industry and community. Academic and information literacy skills continue to be developed, and students will begin to acquire the skills of systematic investigation and critical thinking that will be needed for more advanced levels of study. Students are encouraged to participate in a range of co-curricular learning opportunities that include mentoring programs, service learning and outbound mobility programs.
• The final level of the curriculum intentionally and visibly addresses the transition to professional life and postgraduate study. Capstone units/experiences support students in this transition through reflection on the whole- of-course experience, and aim to purposefully integrate and synthesise knowledge and skills developed throughout the course. The final year provides a coherent linkage between the students’ experiences in the course and their forthcoming emergence into a professional world. Included in the final year are opportunities to integrate and practice their skills in real-world settings, and to demonstrate that they have achieved the learning outcomes desired of the course. Career decision making and preparation for employment are important components of the final-year experience. (QUT MOPP 2009)
Reasons for Undertaking Graduate Mapping
Reasons for becoming involved in curriculum mapping range from an informal interest in developing a particular attribute or set of attributes, to participation in formal program review. Curriculum mapping results in a range of benefits for students, staff, employers and professional bodies.
Benefits for students:
The integration and explicit development of graduate attributes into the curriculum:
• enables students to understand a course or program and its relevance to their study and career aims
• provides opportunities for students to become active participants in their learning
• allows students to develop skills valued by employers
• exposes students to diverse ideas and approaches (e.g. through oral communication, group work and collaborative problem solving activities)
• allows students to experience situations that resemble the workplace i.e. through authentic assessment tasks and real world projects
• encourages students to reflect on their learning and identify areas for improvement
• helps students to become adaptable and to work effectively in constantly changing environments
• helps students to articulate their strengths to potential employers (e.g. through opportunities to record the progress of their skill development such as through student portfolios)
• can provide opportunities for students to work multidisciplinary and multicultural environments
• facilitates a deeper understanding of course content
• can encourage social interaction amongst students (e.g. through group work activities) which may be particularly valuable for isolated, rural and overseas students
• helps students to develop lifelong learning skills
Benefits for staff, employers and professional bodies:
Curriculum mapping allows the graduate attributes in a given course and program to be made explicit. This has several benefits including:
• it assists staff in planning, implementing, and evaluating curriculums
• it provides employers with a clear statement of the generic skills, as well as the disciplinary knowledge, developed in a program
• it can assist professional bodies in their accreditation processes
• it can form a central component of quality assurance and continual improvement processes in a school or faculty. (Adapted from Learning & Teaching @ UNSW, 2008).
A Brief History of Survey and Mapping Programs at QIT/QUT
A varied and arguably chequered background to the current version of the 4-year Spatial Science Program at QUT provides some historical perspective of the past 4 decades. Figure 1 chart the various course name changes surrounding survey and mapping programs at the former Queensland Institute of Technology (QIT) and, since 1989, known as the Queensland University of Technology.
Certificate and Associate Diploma level programs in Cartography were offered from mid-1960s to end of 1989.
The bulk of student numbers (both intake and graduates) have been associated with the Bachelor of Applied Science (Surveying) program, which commenced in 1974, up to the introduction of the Bachelor of Surveying name in 1994. This Surveying degree course was offered until 2005, when the major faculty re-structure occurred with new broad-based education degrees offered with an arguably different undergraduate structural model in the form of Bachelor of Urban Development, major in Spatial Science (see figure 4). First graduates from the Bachelor of Urban Development (Spatial Science) are expected at the end of 2009.
Student numbers in the somewhat niche education markets of post-graduate coursework programs in Surveying Practice, Geomatics and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been low to modest, with a last intake in 2007 due to unviable course enrolments for face-to-face coursework units.
Figure 1: Historical chart outlining survey and mapping courses at QIT/QUT.
Major Restructure of BEE Undergraduate Programs in 2006
The higher education environment is complex and subject to ongoing change. We cannot predict with certainty the detail of events in the future, but we can anticipate some elements of change to come, and we can prepare ourselves to be best positioned to take advantage of opportunities (Coaldrake 2004).
QUT Blueprint, QUT Strategic Plan 2004 set the strategic direction for the university, and clearly spoke of a future of regeneration, engagement and experimentation. In implementing the philosophy of the Blueprint, the Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering (BEE) quinquennial review report mandated the Faculty to a future of
significant organisational change and renewal. The Faculty White Paper, prepared in response to the Blueprint, presents a vision of:
A Faculty committed to renewal and recognised globally for the strength and relevance of its integrated disciplines (Betts 2004).
Broad-based Undergraduate Education Model
The Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering (BEE) used a model of knowledge development based on an entrepreneurial approach to integrated Scholarship. In particular two significant works on higher education systems were used to develop the proposed structure and mode of working in the renewed Faculty. These were Ernest Boyer’s work on scholarship and Burton Clarke’s work on successful entrepreneurial universities (Boyer 1990 and Clarke 1998). The Faculty’s new model of working (figure 2) depicts the scholarly activities of teaching, discovery and application coming together with areas of focused overlap and a central core of scholarly integration (Savage and Betts 2005). Faculty activities are prioritised in accordance with this model; those falling within the central core of integration receiving higher priority.
Figure 2: Faculty of BEE model of working (modified from Crowther and Savage 2005).
New courses within BEE would seek to integrate the scholarly activities of teaching, discovery and application. No longer would teaching and learning activities sit in isolation, rather students would engage with discovery and application as structured parts of their undergraduate program of study.
Previous to 2005, the Faculty of BEE had approximately seventy three undergraduate courses; a hugely
disproportionate number for its student population of approximately 4400. An associated reduction in the number of units (subjects) being taught was also called for in the White Paper of Betts (2004). More significantly, the university had called for course structures to facilitate students studying across faculty boundaries; thereby engaging in secondary fields of study that would see their specialising or broadening their education beyond their primary field of study (Crowther and Savage 2005).
Professional organizations have called for graduates that are more able to operate collaboratively as team members within a broader group of professionals operating on complex problems not limited to one discipline. In particular, QUT graduates need to be: outgoing and connected; enterprising and innovative; community and society
responsible; and providing and focussing on leadership (Engineers Australia 1996). There is an increasing need also for broader social views and multi-disciplinary skills and a student focus on values (Foxell 2003). In essence, QUT graduates need to be more outward looking as trans-disciplinary specialists. New courses would therefore have to develop broader capabilities within our graduates, and in so doing offer students a greater range of study choices.
The renewed courses share a common structure; all courses ‘fit’ the structure shown at Figure 3 (note that this diagram is not temporal but simply proportional) (Crowther and Savage 2005). The structure for the renewed BEE courses sees just three undergraduate degrees within the faculty, each with a number of majors, or discipline study areas. Groups of cognate disciplines come together around agreed and shared broad fields of knowledge, forming three like-minded groups of disciplines, each developing its own course (adapted from Webb and Hayes 2006).
Figure 3: Design Model of the Shared Course Structure
Crother and Savage (2008) describe this coming together of these Faculty goals, and ideas of transformative learning, it was possible to develop a common course structure (model) that would allow for the individuality of the disciplines to prevail, while also providing, and indeed encouraging, trans-disciplinary activity. These two notions of discipline focus and flexibility/choice exist as shared possibilities that promote self-constructed, divergent learning. These courses would provide the student with:
• Opportunities for self construction and divergence
• Opportunities for integrated trans-disciplinary study
• Opportunities to learning through and in practice (workplace learning)
• Opportunities for articulation
• Opportunities to engage in discovery (research) and application (external and community service) activities through a thematic approach to faculty activities.(Crother and Savage 2008)
The Spatial Science program at QUT has three distinctive themes largely influenced by feedback from industry (private, corporate and government) and the professional representative bodies. The measurement science focused theme is predominantly a sequential learning pathway that relies upon pre-requisite unit knowledge that builds from unit to unit. The later semester units rely upon successful completion of the science/maths minor (four units).
Four faculty wide units, two in first year, two in the last year, provide agreement with the broad structural design of the courses to be offered from 2006.
A land development focused theme contains a strong cadastral surveying “flavour” influenced by negotiated input from the Qld Surveyors Board as being able to meet educational requirements leading to registration as a surveyor.
Recognition has been achieved (January 2008) for this new Spatial Science course structure when mapped against the Qld Surveyors Board Competency frameworks.
Figure 4: Course Matrix of the New Spatial Science Major of the Bachelor of Urban Development Course.
The Spatial Science program has three distinctive themes largely influenced by feedback from industry (private, corporate and government) and the professional representative bodies. The measurement science centric theme is predominantly a sequential learning pathway that relies upon pre-requisite unit knowledge that builds from unit to unit. The later semester units rely upon successful completion of the science/maths minor (four units). Four faculty wide units, two in first year, two in the last year, provide agreement with the broad structural design of the courses to be offered from 2006.
A land development theme contains a strong cadastral surveying “flavour” influenced by negotiated input from the Qld Surveyors Board as being able to meet educational requirements leading to registration as a surveyor.
Recognition has been achieved for this new Spatial Science course structure when mapped against the Qld Surveyors Board Competency frameworks.
Figure 5: Mapping/ GIS Theme units highlighted from the older Bachelor of Surveying Course.
Mapping and GIS themes- What was the Cartography Journey?
The Mapping and GIS focused theme of the new 32 unit Spatial Science program have contracted to an identified six and half units (twenty percent). The first year, first semester unit known as Geospatial Positioning and GPS conveniently abridges the Measurement Science and Mapping Science themes and is intended as a introductory
foundation unit (thus the half unit contribution to Mapping Science). Looking to the recent past, an identified Mapping/GIS theme was partially evident of the previous Bachelor of Surveying program 1994-2005. Figure 5 provides a course structure of this older Surveying program with the mapping/ GIS related units highlighted. An obvious contraction of cartography/ mapping/ spatial information units has occurred from the 2006 incremental implementation, as evident in contrast with the lower two themes of the course matrix in figure 4.
However, a continuing strength between these two surveying and mapping courses (comparing 2005 with 2008) has been the teaching alignment of photogrammetric mapping principles, practice and applications. The
preliminary curriculum mapping process has shown a consistency in delivery and outcomes through this photogrammetric unit.
The focused mapping and GIS theme attempts to incorporate a modernised teaching approach in the delivery of the following units. * indicated the authors direct involvement in core units.
• Geographic Information Systems
• Remote Sensing (previously only an elective unit)
• Geospatial Mapping*
• Spatial and Land Information Management
• Photogrammetric Mapping*
• Spatial Analysis Practice
Three-dimensional visualization, also known as geo-visualization, is another significant trend in modern
cartography and a through review of this area can be found in Dykes et al (2005). The unit structure of the new unit titled Geospatial Mapping was completely renewed, designed and modernised from 2008. This unit contains more focus on multimedia cartography (influenced by Cartwright et.al.2007); geo-visualization (influenced in part by Dykes et al. 2005); design of multi media mapping products (influenced by Miller and others 2007); aspects for practical map production principles and practice (linkage with previous unit and QUT Mapping Science laboratory resources). This unit also provides a foundation to broad mapping concepts before the photogrammetric mapping is applied utilizing softcopy photogrammetric techniques.
During the last decade, significant developments in technology applicable for hard and soft copy map design and production. Although a number of different software types used for mapping, such as Computer Aided Design (CAD), Computer Aided Mapping (CAM) and graphics packages, there has seen an increase in the use of GIS for cartographic applications. According to Blacks 2005 study, this situation is due in part to both improvements in cartographic capabilities of GIS and the proliferation of source mapping data in GIS formats. In addition, the integration of GIS and the core IT systems leading to ‘enterprise GIS’ often linked to workflow and resource systems has further enhanced the use of GIS for mapping, especially in national mapping agencies and military mapping organisations.
Realities of Academic work in High Education
In recent times a number of significant factors have been reported that had a major affect on the capacity of universities to develop and maintain arguably sustainable education programs in this country. (Cartwright et al 2000; Bellman et al 2006; Mishra 2008).
These factors include but are by no means limited to the following issues:
• High rate of technological change.
• Vagaries of government policy towards higher education – funding models for example.
• Changing systems and approaches to research quality or excellence in research.
• Stress and workload issues associated with a general reduction in staffing numbers.
• Limited resources and difficulty with replacement and refurbishment of equipment and facilities.
• Performance based workplaces with increased complexity related to socio-economic-techno problems.
Contemporary universities are “rapidly changing legal, social, economic and technological environments”
characterised by the conflict they are experiencing between corporate and academic cultures (Ferren 2001). With significant changes in the past decade to society’s attitude to higher education, universities have changed their management structures to become more entrepreneurial, competitive, strategic and arguably more administratively bureaucratic.
Back in 2000, Professor Lodwick commented about some trends in tertiary education for tomorrows spatial scientists. One noticeable trend was …..the most significant change is corporatisation. More and more universities are beginning to be operated as independent businesses. Corporatisation can be seen in the trend to more
hierarchical structures, the consolidation of teaching areas into larger business units without regard to academic issues, the widespread imposition of business systems in staff and student management, more emphases on financial reporting and accountability, the drive to outside income generation, and cost reduction strategies such as outsourcing of many support functions. While currently there exists 37 federally funded universities and only two or three private universities, the difference between government funded and the private universities is likely to become more blurred in future.
Work Integrated Learning- What is it?
Work-integrated learning (WIL), which provides opportunities for students to apply theoretical knowledge, develop and consolidate skills, reflect on practice, and develop an understanding of the relevant profession or related sectors is essential to providing real-world experiences. All undergraduate courses are expected to provide the opportunity for students to undertake various forms of work-integrated learning during their course, including work experience in industry / professional workplaces, at least as an elective. Work-integrated learning opportunities are expected to build mutually beneficial and long-term outcomes for the student, the University and the participating industry / professional workplaces or communities.
A distinctive feature of effective work-placement programmes (such as occurs in nursing programs) is that they involve partnerships among diverse groups: employers, students, academic teachers, higher education managers and professional bodies. Students receive instrumental ‘training’ and employability skills are arguably captured on the job while at the same time students gain insight into the pressures of the work environment within various organisations. In contrast, the stakeholder’s emphasis is on learning (training?) and often adopts a longer-term view seeking benefits for all parties. Host organisations usually and intentionally develop teamwork, communication and interpersonal skills through a range of specific work projects.
There is increasing pressure on Australian Universities to give greater emphasis and accept more responsibility for
“graduate employability”. Systems currently in place hold universities accountable for their graduates’ success in gaining employment. The Graduate Destination Survey (GDS) and the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) are two instruments used nationally to measure and report on this (Franz, 2008).
One of the main ways universities have responded to these demands has been to include some form of work placement during or at the end of the student’s course of study. Orrell (2004) describes how recent research
“…illustrates that students who had undertaken a work-integrated learning experience or a skill-development component during their course of study were more likely than others to have reflected positively on their university experience and to have achieved employment within their chosen field”. The way in which work-based learning has been implemented varies from university to university and course to course. Some professionals such as architecture, engineering, medicine, teaching for example, have a long history of requiring students to undertake and complete a component or components of work practice; developing in the process their own descriptors, such as practicum, internships, work experience, to mention a few. (Webb and Hayes, 2008)
Conclusion
Ongoing development in both the theory and principle and practice aspects of Mapping Science, Cartography and Geographic/Spatial Information Systems will continue to present opportunities and challenges for universities. The challenge of curriculum design at university level is to adapt programmes within structural constraints to respond to the incremental theoretical and practical developments to enhance the education of tomorrow’s Mapping Science and GIS professionals.
The role of curriculum mapping in whole of course design has been shown to be a useful process to academic and unit content advisors as it often looks at recent past reflections, is informed by communities of best practice and attempts to manage rapidly changing technology relating to technical and professional issues. Academic staffs contributing to the school and faculty undergraduate programs agree that applying curriculum mapping to a course re-design, supported by industry stakeholders, will provide outstanding learning environments and lead to excellent outcomes for future spatial science graduates.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the support of the School of Urban Development, Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering at QUT, Brisbane, in the preparation of this paper and the associated research.
However, the views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the individuals or organisational groups.
References
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). (1999). Curriculum Mapping: charting the course for content. Alexandria: Vancouver.
Bellman C., Williamson I., McDougall K., Rizos C. (2006) Challenges Facing Spatial Information and Geomatics Education in the Higher Education Sector. Proceedings of Combined 5th Trans Tasman Survey Conference and 2nd Queensland Spatial Industry Conference 2006. Spatial Science Institute of Australia. Cairns.
Betts M. (2004) White Paper – The Founding Principles of the New Faculty, QUT Faculty of BEE Strategic Plan, Brisbane, Queensland University of Technology
Black M. (2005) A University Challenge: Integrating Cartography and GIS Curriculum, Proceedings of 5th annual ESRI education user’s conference. http://training.esri.com/campus/library/Bibliography/ RecordDetail.cfm?ID=58162 (accessed December 2008).
Boyer E. (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: priorities for the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Cartwright W. and Peterson M. (2007) Multimedia Cartography. In Multimedia Cartography 2nd Edition., ed. W.Cartwright, M. Peterson, G. Gartner. New York: Springer.
Cartwright W., Edwards N., Fraser D., Pupedis G. (2000) From Cartography to Multimedia Cartography: the metamorphosis of an educational program. Proceedings of Mapping Sciences Institute Australia National Conference 2000, Sydney.
Clarke B. (1998) Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organisational Pathways of Transformation. New York: Pergamon.
Coaldrake P. (2004) QUT Blueprint, QUT Strategic Plan, Brisbane, Queensland University of Technology.
Crowther, P., Savage, S., (2008) The changing role of universities and flexible course re-development, Proceedings of BEAR2008; CIB W89: International Conference in Building Education and Research, Sri Lanka.
Dykes, J., MacEachren, A.M., Kraak, M-J. (2005) Exploring Geo-visualization. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.
Engineers Australia (1996) Changing the Culture of Engineering Education, Engineers Australia, 1996.
Ferren, A.S.(2001) Reconciling Corporate and Academic Cultures, Peer Review: emerging trends and key debates in undergraduate education, Vol. 3,No. 3, 9-17. http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-sp01/ (accessed November 2008)
Foxell S. (2003) The Professional’s Choice: the future of the built environment professions, Building Futures, London, 2003.
Lodwick G. (2000) Trends in Tertiary Education for Tomorrow’s Spatial Scientists. Proceedings of Mapping Sciences Institute Australia National Conference 2000, Sydney.
Miller S. (2007) Design of Multimedia Mapping Products. In Multimedia Cartography 2nd Edition., ed. W.Cartwright, M.
Peterson, G. Gartner. 88-102. New York: Springer.
Mishra S. (2008) Accreditation criteria of engineering curriculum in Australia, USA and India: the role of non technical subjects. Proceedings of International Conference on Global Challenges in Engineering Education and Research. Coimbatore, India.
Orrell, J. (2004) Work-integrated Learning Programmes: Management and Educational Quality. Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004. Available Internet http://www.auqa.edu.au/auqf/2004/program/papers/Orrell.pdf (accessed October 2008) Also Flinders University: Model of Best Practice for Work-based Learning, available Online Internet
http://www.flinders.edu.au/teach/t4l/practicum/examples/bestpractice.php
Queensland University of Technology – Teaching and Learning Support Services. (2005). QUT Teaching Capabilities Framework. http://www.talss.qut.edu.au/staff/awardsgrants/awards/tcf.pdf (accessed November 2008).
Queensland University of Technology. (2009). Curriculum Design Policy- Section C/4.2, Manual of Policies and Procedures MOPP. Intranet http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_04_02.jsp (accessed February 2009)
Savage S. and Betts M. (2005) Boyer reconsidered: priorities for framing academic work, HERDSA Conference, ‘Higher Education in a Changing World’. Sydney.
University of New South Wales- Learning & Teaching. (2008). Graduate Attributes Chapter, Curriculum Matters.
http://learningandteaching.unsw.edu.au/content/LT/course_prog_support/graduate_attributes.cfm (accessed December 3, 2008).
University of Queensland – Teaching and Learning Support. (2008). Teaching and Learning Support (TEDI) Graduate Attributes, Mapping and Embedding Graduate Attributes. http://www.tedi.uq.edu.au/teaching/GradAttributes/index.html (accessed November 2008).
Webb R.M., Hayes J.F. (2006) Spatial Science Education Directions for QUT, Proceedings of Combined 5th Trans Tasman Survey Conference & 2nd Queensland Spatial Industry Conference 2006, Spatial Science Institute of Australia, Cairns.
Webb R.M., Hayes J.F. (2008) Work Integrated Learning: Will it Work for Spatial Science Wilers?, Proceedings of Queensland Spatial Conference 2008, Spatial Science Institute of Australia, Gold Coast.
