The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A research‐based approach to generic graduate attributes policy
Abstract
For many years universities around the world have sought to articulate the nature of the education they offer to their students through a description of the generic qualities and skills their graduates possess. Despite the lengthy history of the rhetoric of such policy claims, universities' endeavours to describe generic attributes of graduates continue to lack a clear theoretical or conceptual base and are characterized by a plurality of view‐points. Furthermore, despite extensive funding in some quarters, overall, efforts to foster the development of generic attributes appear to have met with limited success. Recent research has shed some light on this apparent variability in policy and practice. It is apparent that Australian university teachers charged with responsibility for developing students' generic graduate attributes do not share a common understanding of either the nature of these outcomes, or the teaching and learning processes that might facilitate the development of these outcomes. Instead academics hold qualitatively different conceptions of the phenomenon of graduate attributes. This paper considers how the qualitatively different conceptions of graduate attributes identified in this research have been applied to the challenge of revising a university's policy statement specifying the generic attributes of its graduates. The paper outlines the key findings of the research and then describes how the university's revision of its policy statement has built upon this research, adopting a research‐led approach to academic development. The resultant two‐tiered policy is presented and the key academic development processes associated with the disciplinary contextualization of this framework are considered. The discussion explores some of the implications of this novel approach to structuring a university's policy, in particular, the variation in the relationship between discipline knowledge and generic attributes which was a key feature of the qualitative variation in understandings identified in the research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Turner, N., Wuetherick, B., & Healey, M. (2008) · International Journal for Academic Development · doi:10.1080/13601440802242333 · Cited by 103
Walkington, H., Dyer, S., Solem, M., Haigh, M., & Waddington, S. (2018) · Journal of Geography in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03098265.2017.1379060 · Cited by 67
Jackson, D., & Wilton, N. (2017) · Journal of Education and Work · doi:10.1080/13639080.2016.1255314 · Cited by 61
Vermunt, J. D., Ilie, S., & Vignoles, A. (2018) · Higher Education Pedagogies · doi:10.1080/23752696.2018.1484672 · Cited by 46
Marks Should Not Be the Focus of Assessment – But How Can Change Be Achieved?
Thompson, D. G. (2016) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2016.32.9 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Barrie *, S. C.
- Venue
- Higher Education Research & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 261-275
- ISSN
- 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8366
- OpenAlex
- W4254881204
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A research‐based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/0729436042000235391
- The paper
- Barrie *, S. C. (2004). A research‐based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235391
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.