Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Re-framing the geography dissertation: A consideration of alternative, innovative and creative approaches

Hill, Jennifer; Kneale, Pauline; Nicholson, Dawn; Waddington, Shelagh; Ray, Waverly

Re-framing the geography dissertation: A consideration of alternative, innovative and creative approaches Thumbnail


Authors

Jenny Hill Jennifer.Hill@uwe.ac.uk
Associate Professor in Teaching and Learning

Pauline Kneale

Dawn Nicholson

Shelagh Waddington

Waverly Ray



Abstract

This paper reviews the opportunities and challenges for re-framing the purpose, process, product and assessment of final-year geography dissertations. It argues that the academic centralities of critical thinking, analysis, evaluation, effective communication and independence must be retained, but that the traditional format limits creativity and innovation. Re-imagining capstone projects has implications for students, faculty, departments and institutions, but greater diversity could enhance its relevance to students and employers, better aligning the student experience with the academic interests and future career demands of the 21st century graduate. © 2011 Taylor & Francis.

Citation

Hill, J., Kneale, P., Nicholson, D., Waddington, S., & Ray, W. (2011). Re-framing the geography dissertation: A consideration of alternative, innovative and creative approaches. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 35(3), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.563381

Journal Article Type Review
Publication Date Aug 1, 2011
Deposit Date Nov 1, 2011
Publicly Available Date Mar 28, 2024
Journal Journal of Geography in Higher Education
Print ISSN 0309-8265
Electronic ISSN 1466-1845
Publisher Taylor & Francis (Routledge)
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 35
Issue 3
Pages 331-349
DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.563381
Keywords dissertation, capstone project, creativity, innovation, assessment
Public URL https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/960402
Publisher URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2011.563381

Files

Hill et al revised version clean.docx (72 Kb)
Document






You might also like



Downloadable Citations