Supporting programme teams to develop sequencing in higher education curricula

References

• Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead: SRHE & Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beetham, H. (2009). Synthesis report: Baselining the institutional processes of curriculum design: JISC ‘Institutional approaches to curriculum design’ programme. Bristol: JISC. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/curriculumdesign.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. London: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). ‪Teaching for quality learning at university‬: ‪What the student does (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blackmore, P., & Blackwell, R. (2006). Strategic leadership in academic development. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 373–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). London: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Brecher, B. (2005). Complicity and modularisation: How universities were made safe for the market. Critical Quarterly, 47, 1–2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond, R. M. (1998). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: A practical guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Errington, E. (2004). The impact of teacher beliefs on flexible learning innovation: Some practices and possibilities for academic developers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41, 39–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, S., & Bosanquet, A. (2006). The curriculum? That’s just a unit outline, isn’t it? Studies in Higher Education, 31, 269–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Harden, R. M., & Stamper, N. (1999). What is a spiral curriculum? Medical Teacher, 21, 141–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, M., Bradford, M., Roberts, C., & Knight, Y. (2011). Collaborative discipline-based curriculum change: Applying change academy processes at department level. International Journal of Academic Development, 18(1), 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Hubball, H., & Gold, N. (2007). The scholarship of curriculum practice and undergraduate program reform: Theory–practice integration. Retrieved from http://www.cte.hawaii.edu/handouts/HH_NG_Ch1_2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, C. (2011). National strategy for higher education to 2030: Report of the strategy group. Dublin: Department of Education and Skills. Retrieved from http://www.hea.ie/sites/default/files/national_strategy_for_higher_education_2030.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, A. (1996). Discipline-based educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, 1, 50–62.
   Google Scholar
• Land, R., Meyer, J. H. F., & Smith, J. (2008). Threshold concepts within the disciplines. Rotterdam: Sense Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for blended e-learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Neary, M. (2002). Curriculum studies in post compulsory and adult education: A teacher’s and student teacher’s study guide. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, G. (2010). Initiating curriculum revision: Exploring the practices of educational developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 15, 61–71.
   Google Scholar
• Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2009). Curriculum foundations, principles and issues (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Popham, W. J. (2007). The lowdown on learning progressions. The Prepared Graduate, 64, 83–84.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, K. J. (2011). The rise of choice in the U.S. University and College: 1910–2005. Sociological Forum, 26, 601–622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schönwetter, D. J., Sokal, L., Friesen, M., & Taylor, K. L. (2002). Teaching philosophies reconsidered: A conceptual model for the development and evaluation of teaching philosophy statements. International Journal for Academic Development, 7, 83–97.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, J. S. (2000). Planning introductory college courses: Content, context and form. Instructional Science, 28, 413–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson, J., & Yorke, M. (1998). Creating the conditions for the development of capability. In J. Stephenson & M. Yorke (Eds.), Capability and quality in higher education (pp. 193–225). London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Sumsion, J., & Goodfellow, J. (2004). Identifying generic skills through curriculum mapping: A critical evaluation. Higher Education Research and Development, 23, 329–346.
   Google Scholar
• Sundberg, M. D., DeAngelis, P., Havens, K., Zorn-Arnold, B., Kramer, A. T., Holsinger, K., … Stritch, L. (2011). Perceptions of strengths and deficiencies: Disconnects between graduate students and prospective employers. BioScience, 61, 133–138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toohey, S. (1999). Designing courses for higher education. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trow, M. (1992). Class, race and higher education in America. In E. Margolis (Ed.), The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 355–403). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vidic, B., & Weitlauf, H. M. (2002). Horizontal and vertical integration of academic disciplines in the medical school curriculum. Clinical Anatomy, 15, 233–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willig, C. (2001). Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and method. Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ziegenfuss, D. (2007). A phenomenographic analysis of course design in the academy. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 2, 70–79.
   Google Scholar