Briant, Sarah (2024) Bridging theory and practice: Exploring work-integrated learning in architecture from the profession's perspective. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
Abstract
This research investigates differing perceptions and expectations between universities and architectural practices regarding skills to best prepare graduates for practice. This research proposes that Work-integrated Learning (WIL) experiences offer opportunities to bridge theory and practice. Through understanding the needs of WIL stakeholders: universities, students, and architecture practice, this research recommends strategies to bring the different worlds of universities and practice together for a shared vision of WIL in architectural education. This research addresses industry and governments’ expectations for graduates to be practice ready and reports on the benefits of WIL for all stakeholders.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Burton, Lindy Osborne; Clifton, Jenniver and Crowther, Philip |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | work-integrated learning; architectural education; architecture practice; architecture profession; Delphi; taxonomy |
| Index terms: | architectural practice, profession, taxonomy, architectural education, strategy |
| Subjects: | curriculum design, institututions, data analysis and analytics, business, management |
| Topics: | Education, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here