Search results

This paper aims to present key findings from an inquiry into engineering accreditation and curricula renewal. The research attempted to ascertain conceptions of requisite sustainability themes among engineering academics and professionals. The paper also reflects on the potential role of professional engineering institutions (PEIs) in embedding sustainability through their programme accreditation guidelines and wider implications in terms of rapid curricula renewal.

This research comprised an International Engineering Academic Workshop held during the 2010 International Symposium on Engineering Education in Ireland, on “accreditation and sustainable engineering”. This built on the findings of a literature review that was distributed prior to the workshop. Data collection included individual questionnaires administered during the workshop, and notes scribed by workshop participants.

The literature review highlighted a wide range of perspectives across and within engineering disciplines, regarding what sustainability/sustainable development (SD) themes should be incorporated into engineering curricula, and regarding language and terminology. This was also reflected in the workshop discussions. Notwithstanding this diversity, clusters of sustainability themes and priority considerations were distilled from the literature review and workshop. These related to resources, technology, values, ethics, inter‐ and intra‐generational equity, transdisciplinarity, and systems and complex thinking. Themes related to environmental and economic knowledge and skills received less attention by workshop participants than represented in the literature.

This paper provides an appreciation of the diversity of opinion regarding priority sustainability themes for engineering curricula, among a group of self‐selected engineering academics who have a common interest in education for SD. It also provides some insights and caveats on how these themes might be rapidly integrated into engineering curricula.

Western management philosophy and thought have been around for millennia; however, the supremacy of its concepts and writings has become a subject of criticisms in Africa. There is a huge gap in African management education which calls for redesigning of management curriculum to affirm African social orientation and self-determination that will enable new forms of learning and knowledge required to tackle complex global challenges. The objective of this chapter is to review Western management thought and practice vis-à-vis the existing management philosophy in Africa prior to her colonisation and advocate the need to redesign management curricula. To accomplish the aforementioned objective, this chapter took a historical, reflective and systematic approach of literature review to advance renewal of management curricula in Africa. The analysis began with a review of pre-colonial management philosophy and thought in Africa, followed by a discussion of how colonialism obstructed and promoted the universality of management. This was followed by a review of African traditional society and indigenous management philosophies. The chapter discussed topics that should feature in an African-oriented management curriculum and highlighted fundamental constructs that can be fused into management curriculum of business schools/teaching in Africa. The chapter also made a case for a flexible management curriculum structure that is broader than the conventional transmission-of-knowledge building which views students as passive learners’ by adopting suitable pedagogical tools that will be relevant for knowledge transmission and assessment and also enhance learning and management practices that is culturally fit and relevant to global practice.

This chapter addresses the balancing act between curriculum guidance and curriculum space, against the backdrop of an integral curriculum review at the national/macro level in the Netherlands, labelled ‘Curriculum.nu’. As part of this review initiative, many choices have to be made, reflecting answers to the following two questions: What balance is needed between curriculum regulation at the macro level and the provision of curricular space for schools at the meso and the micro level? And, what are the related responsibilities of all involved in the educational system web in order to make the curriculum change successful? Before getting to tentative answers, the chapter will provide an introduction to curriculum policy in the Netherlands and will offer an overview of the motives, aims, approaches and preliminary results of Curriculum.nu. The provisional answers include a set of research-informed principles for making the curriculum review efforts a success, including a call for dovetailing the various curriculum layers and for a strategic curriculum mix of room for school-specific decision-making, substantive guidance, support by exemplification and firm investments in professional development.

The national core curriculum is renewed in Finland approximately every ten years, the most recent one being 2016. The core curriculum sets the general goals, providing the foundation for district- and school level curriculum development work (Finnish National Board of Education, 2016). The messages from transnational educational policy (e.g. OECD) are apparent in the core curriculum. However, districts, schools and teachers are highly autonomous in upholding, resourcing and deciding about the curriculum making at the local sites of activity. Accordingly, the curriculum making relies heavily on shared sense-making as a tool for cultivating transformative learning throughout the educational system. The chapter draws on the results of the national “School Matters” research project (2014-2018), to provide the meta-analysis of the sense-making in national curriculum making. Results suggested that the shared sense-making focused on engaging educational practitioners in learning at all layers of the system. However, the means for facilitating shared sense-making between the different layers of the system and curriculum was perceived to be less coherent by the stakeholders at the district and school level, than at the state level. This implies that the educational providers should not only be involved in co-creation of the aims, contents and values of the curriculum document, but also in designing novel and ecologically valid ways for orchestrating the complex and dynamic curriculum making.

This article presents a synoptic view of the dramatic environmental change which presently confronts Australian management educators. Written at the same time as the landmark Karpin Committee’s enquiry into the needs of Australian management into the next century, the discussion echoes many of Karpin’s sentiments although it presents the views of educators, which may not always coincide with the views of practitioners. Important issues discussed include: the underlying “philosophy of management education”; the perennial “theory versus practice” debate; the present role of government in influencing the “shape” of management education; the relationship between universities and their industrial clients; the necessity to continuously renew the curriculum; the desirability of collaboration between universities; appropriate use of technology as a delivery mechanism and in the curriculum; the supply of appropriately qualified academics; accreditation; “students as customers” and, finally, the nature of management itself. As might be anticipated, the necessity for business schools to be innovative, flexible and responsive to the dictates of the changing environment is emphasised as is the importance of developing a national character of Australian management education which reflects Australia’s needs and position in the global and regional marketplace.

This article is an Information File made available by the International Bureau of Education. It summarises issues and trends in primary education worldwide, looking at general policy, organisation, management, the content of curricula, and teaching methods. A bibliography is provided together with a list of national and international centres which may provide information about primary education.

Since its inception in 1975, Murdoch University in Western Australia has been unusual in the Australian context with its focus on interdisciplinarity in undergraduate education. Murdoch University has long claimed interdisciplinarity to be one of its distinguishing features. It has a university-wide policy on interdisciplinarity, and specifies ‘interdisciplinarity’ as one of the attributes students are expected to have when they graduate, that is: ‘A capacity to acquire knowledge and understanding of fields of study beyond a single discipline’. All Murdoch University students are introduced to interdisciplinary study in compulsory first-year foundation units that are the cornerstone of a Part 1 programme of studies. Foundation units aim to introduce students to university study, provide a broad perspective and expose students to a range of disciplines and teaching styles. Encouraging the exploration of a range of options before students proceed to their chosen field of study is dependent on a tradition of flexibility that enables students to move easily between and across disciplines. Over the years, the Part 1 programme at Murdoch University has been eroded by disciplinary demands on students, but the basic principles continue to be reaffirmed by external reviews and from within the university. Recently, the value of general undergraduate education has been further reinstated as other Australian universities have begun to investigate and instigate interdisciplinary programmes of study. The trend towards breadth in undergraduate education in Australia provides cause for reflection on interdisciplinarity at Murdoch University. This chapter describes the Murdoch University experience using the author's intimate knowledge of the University and draws on literature on interdisciplinarity to frame the lessons that have been learned over the past 30 years.

The purpose of this paper is to present the case for engineering departments to undertake rapid curriculum renewal (RCR) towards engineering education for sustainable development (EESD), to minimise the department's risk exposure to rapidly shifting industry requirements, government regulations and program accreditation. This paper then outlines a number of elements of RCR.

This paper begins by proposing that Higher Education Institutions face a “time lag dilemma,” whereby the usual or “standard” curriculum renewal approach to embed new knowledge and skills within the curriculum may take too long, lagging behind industry, regulatory, and accreditation shifts. This paper then outlines a proposed RCR approach. This paper presents a number of preliminary “elements of RCR” formulated from a literature review of numerous existing but largely ad hoc examples of curriculum renewal within engineering and other discipline areas, together with the authors' experience in trialling the elements.

This paper concludes that a strategically implemented process of curriculum renewal to EESD can help a department address its risk exposure to likely and impending shifts in industry, regulations and accreditation. A number of examples of implementing “elements of RCR” are emerging and this literature can inform a strategic approach to curriculum renewal.

The aim of this paper is to highlight the potential risks and opportunities for engineering departments as they consider “how far” and “how fast” to proceed with curriculum renewal for EESD, along with providing an overview of a range of options for implementation.

This paper fulfils an identified information/resources need.

This chapter reports on research work which was a component of an independent review of the primary school curriculum renewal exercise that was commissioned by the Ministry of Education in Trinidad and Tobago and executed during 2012–2013. It examines how agencies functioned to engender educational change through education governance systems in the process of revising the curriculum. Turbulence Theory (Gross, 2014) was the tool used to explore the interactions among agencies. The research shows that turbulence occurred at various stages and that the outcome of interactions among the agencies that were in pursuit of educational change and equity was largely dependent on the extent of the turbulence and how it was managed. For example, the local Curriculum Planning Team (CPT) was able to learn from external consultants while firmly maintaining that they were the ones who had a deep understanding of the local context and should therefore have a major say in what was included in the curriculum. However, the CPT could do little to offset the severe turbulence caused when the political directorate mandated that there should be full-scale implementation of the revised curriculum without the benefit of a pilot. The role of socio-political contextual factors in the curriculum development process is highlighted.

The aim of this paper is to present the challenges external drivers and internal inertia faced by curriculum designers and implementers at institutions of higher education. The challenges to academics from competing factors are presented: internal resistance to changing existing curricula vs the necessity to continuously evolve programmes to reflect a dynamic, uncertain future. The necessity to prepare future leaders to face global issues such as climate change, dictates changing curricula to reflect changing personal, environmental and societal needs.

This paper uses the case study method to examine two models of climate change curriculum design and renewal. One model, from an Australian university, is based upon national education standards and the second is a non-standards-based curriculum design, developed and delivered by a partnership of four North American universities.

The key findings from this study are that the highest level of participation by internal-to-the-programme academics and administrators is required. Programme quality, delivery and content alignment may be compromised with either stand-alone course delivery and learning outcomes, or if courses are developed independently of others in the programme. National educational standards can be effective tools to guide course and programme management, monitoring, review and updating.

The paper includes implications for postgraduate level curricula design, implementation and programme evaluation.

The paper is the first to compare, contrast and critique a national standards-based, higher education curriculum and a non-standards-based curriculum.