Concluding Thoughts

Negotiating the multiple contexts and drivers surrounding curriculum development can, in reality, be messy. Ashwin et al. (2015) acknowledge that beyond the seemingly straightforward alignment of a set of curricular elements, there is much added complexity, and an urge that a holistic, and ultimately realistic, perspective be applied to the process. Within such a holistic approach, consider the aspirations and learning pathways of your students, as well as the wider educational environment, including any extra-curricular opportunities that might be available to enrich students’ learning experiences. For design educators developing curricula, there are arguably added complexities in higher education environments, and some of these have been noted across the chapter, including unique studio learning environments and subjectivities in assessing work with creative elements.

Whilst the chapter has spanned a huge topic area, we have attempted to provide relatable examples from our own experiences along the way, with practical points for your consideration, supplemented by a valuable set of specialist reference works for you to consult when undertaking such a curriculum journey. Whilst the chapter by necessity highlights the many tricky corners in this process, the successes have also been numerous.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the many academics, professional support staff and student partners who work tirelessly in bringing their expertise, commitment and passion to ensuring that the Bachelor of Design course achieves the best possible outcomes for students, their future needs, and those of the discipline.

References

Ardington, A., & Drury, H. (2017). Design studio discourse in architecture in Australia: The role of formative feedback in assessment. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 16(2), 157-170.

Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J., & Brown, C. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 59(2), 205-222. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2013.819566

Ashwin. P. (2014). Knowledge, curriculum and student understanding in higher education.

Higher Education, 67, 123-126. doi: 10.1007/sl0734-014-9715-3 Ashwin, P.. Boud, D., Coate, K.. Hallett. F., Keane, E., Krause. K„ et al. (2015). Reflective teaching in higher education. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university, 3rd ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press and Society for Research into Higher Education.

Blackmore, R, & Kandiko, C.B. (2012). Strategic curriculum change: Global trends in universities. Society for Research into Higher Education Series. London: Routledge.

Bolton, R. (2019). University funding to be tied more to producing students who get jobs. Financial Review, 2 October, 2019. Retrieved 25 May 2020 from: https://www.afr.com/ policy/health-and-education/university-funding-to-be-tied-more-to-producing-stud ents-who-get-jobs-20191001-p52 wkz

Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Oxford: Berg.

Evans, R., Kelly, N., & Kerr, J. (2021). Being a Design Academic: Design Process, Practice, Thinking. In A. Blackler & E. Miller (Eds.), How to he a design academic. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 13-28.

Fitzgerald, R., Huijser, H., Meth, D., & Neilan, D. (2019). Student-staff partnerships in academic development: The course design studio as a model for sustainable coursewide impact. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(2), 134-146. doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2019.1631170

Gentle, P, & Forman, D. (2014). Engaging leaders: The challenge of inspiring collective commitment in universities. Abingdon: Routledge.

Gusky, T.R. (2007). Closing achievement Gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s “Learning for Mastery”. Journal of Advanced Academics, /9(1), 8-31.

Kaygan, P., & Aydinoglu, A.U. (2018). The role of space in interdisciplinary collaboration in design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 803-817. doi: 10.1007/sl0798-017-9407-2

Lindgren, T. (2021). Industry to academia: The enhanced academic. In A. Blackler & E. Miller (Eds.), How to be a design academic. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 29-44.

Mackh, B.N. (2018). Higher education by deesign: Best practices for curricular planning and instruction. New York: Routledge.

Matthews, K.E., Dwyer, A., Russell, S., & Enright, E. (2019). It is a complicated thing: Leaders’ conceptions of students as partners in the neoliberal university. Studies in Higher Education, 44(12), 2196-2207. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2018.1482268

Meth, D., Finger, M., & Brough, D. (2020). The graduate professional portfolio as “synergy tool”: Navigating the complex role of portfolios in future-focused design education. In S. Boess, M. Cheung, & R. Cain (Eds.), Proceedings of DRS2020: Synergy, Volume 4 Education (pp. 1803-1816). London: Design Research Society, doi: 10.21606/ drs.2020.317

Meth. D., Russell, H R.. Fitzgerald. R.. & Huijser, H. (2020). Enabling scholarship of teaching and learning activities across a curriculum design framework: A lever for faculty engagement. In R. Plews, & M. Amos (Eds.), Evidence-based faculty development through the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) (pp. 347-364). Hershey, PA: IGI Global, doi: 10.4018/978-l-7998-2212-7.ch018

Meyer, J., Land, R., & Baillie, C. (Eds.) (2010). Threshold concepts and transformational learning. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Muller, J., & Young, M. (2014). Disciplines, skills and the university. Higher Education, 67, 127-140. doh 10.1007/sl0734-013-9646-4

Orr, S., & Shreeve, A. (2018). Art and design pedagogy in higher education: Knowledge, values and ambiguity in the creative curriculum. Abingdon: Routledge.

Parker, J. (2003). Reconceptualising the curriculum: From commodification to transformation. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(4), 529-543. doi: 10.1080/1356251032000117616

Parkin, D. (2017). Leading learning and teaching in higher education: The key guide to designing and delivering courses. Abingdon: Routledge.

Race, P. (2007). The lecturer’s toolkit: A practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching, 4th ed. Abingdon: Routledge.

Scott, A., & Thomson, S. (2021). Escaping the studio: A guide to design intensives outside the studio. In A. Blackler & E. Miller (Eds.), How to be a design academic. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 115-134.

Thomson, S., & Scott, A. (2021). Watch this!: Using video and blended learning. In A. Blackler & E. Miller (Eds.), How to be a design academic. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 135-152.

Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. York: Higher Education Academy.

Trowler, R, & Cooper, A. (2002). Teaching and learning regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes. Higher Education Research & Development, 2/(3), 221-240. doi: 10.1080/0729436022000020742

Young, M. (2009). Education, globalisation and the ‘voice of knowledge’. Journal of ,Education and Work, 22(3). 193-204. doi: 10.1080/13639080902957848