[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-594610-105":59,"doc-detail-594610-en":124},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":117,"head_meta":119,"extra_data":121,"updated_unix":123},105,"en","blurred-boundaries-andrys-onsman-clare-newton","Blurred boundaries - Andrys Onsman & Clare Newton","","This paper examines how the University of Melbourne negotiated a common core subject across faculties in the Bachelor of Environments after restructuring in 2008. Reviews since 2009 recommended reducing common core first-year subjects to one, but consensus proved difficult amid blurred cross-faculty governance. The analysis focuses on pedagogy-based and strategy-based decision-making, considering time limits, quality assurance processes, committee approvals, and the use of propellants to counter procedural and institutional retardants while maintaining a purposeful change trajectory.",{"@graph":69,"@context":116},[70,84,99],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/blurred-boundaries-andrys-onsman-clare-newton/594610/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"author":86,"headline":65,"publisher":89,"fileFormat":92,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":93,"datePublished":93,"encodingFormat":92,"isAccessibleForFree":94,"interactionStatistic":95},"DigitalDocument",{"name":87,"@type":88},"Ben ","Person",{"url":74,"name":90,"@type":91},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":96,"interactionType":97,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":98},"ViewAction",{"@type":100,"mainEntity":101},"FAQPage",[102,108,112],{"name":103,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":105},"What change did the reviews recommend for the Bachelor of Environments?","Question",{"text":106,"@type":107},"The reviews recommended reducing the number of common core first-year subjects to one.","Answer",{"name":109,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":110},"Why was reaching consensus difficult across faculties?",{"text":111,"@type":107},"Consensus was hard because cross-faculty management structures relied on agreement rather than authority, while governance and resource control were structurally divided.",{"name":113,"@type":104,"acceptedAnswer":114},"How does the paper distinguish pedagogy-based from strategy-based decisions?",{"text":115,"@type":107},"Pedagogy-based decisions prioritize student learning, retention, satisfaction, and curriculum coherence, while strategy-based decisions focus on maintaining or expanding academic territory, positions, influence, and control.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":118,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":90,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":120,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":122,"site_id":62},594610,1792079488,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":125},{"doc_id":122,"user_id":126,"nickname":87,"user_avatar":127,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":128,"file_id":129,"file_url":130,"file_type":131,"file_size":132,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":44,"language":133,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":134,"faqs":135,"seo_title":136,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":123,"read_time":137},2336478951081,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","A U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nBlurred boundaries  \nNegotiating a common core subject in a multi-faculty Bachelor of Environments degree  \nAndrys Onsman & Clare Newton University of Melbourne  \nIn 2008, the University of Melbourne rolled out its restructured undergraduate degree program offerings. Rather than offering a multitude of faculty-specific degrees, the University started to offer a limited number of generalist degrees that serve as developmental pathways to specialist masters programs as well as stand-alone employment preparation. While the other ‘Melbourne Model’ degrees in arts, science, commerce and biomedicine primarily aligned with their cognate faculty, one degree, the Bachelor of Environments, was taught across four faculties. Three reviews of this unusual undergraduate degree have been undertaken since 2009 with each recommending that the degree reduce the number of common core first year subjects to one. However, the decision to reduce to one core subject proved difficult within the blurred boundaries of cross-faculty management structures. This paper analyses the strategies being used to reach consensus following the most recent review.  \nKeywords: interdisciplinary degrees, curriculum reform, change management  \nThe task of reaching a consensus among a diverse set of discipline-based academics spread across separate faculties is fundamentally one of amalgamating opinion from widely divergent areas of expertise within the constraints of time and institutional functional requirements. The emergent consensus needs to be pedagogically sound, both in terms of being studentfocussed and learning-centred and as a fundamental element of a degree program that functions as preparation for both further study and entry into the workforce.This paper tracks a specific component of the change process precipitated by a review recommendation to change substantially the structure of a cross-faculty taught degree in a way that would likely have significant impact on content as well as student-fee distribution. It focuses on two main aspects: the pedagogy-based decision-making and the strategy-based decision-making. By the former we mean decisions that are made primarily on pedagogic grounds: improved student learning, retention, course satisfaction, curriculum development, course coherence and so on. By the latter we mean decisions that are based  \non maintaining or expanding academic territory, ensuring that staff retain their positions, decisions that maintain or increase influence and control and so on.  \nThe calendars of most universities require changes toadhere to rigid timetables as well as due processes, most of which are based on quality assurance. In general, this means that decisions need to be made at predetermined times, in accordance with predetermined regulatory criteria. Whereas on the one hand, the structure can expedite change, it can also be used to delay change in circumstances, such as cross-faculty decision-making, where changes need to rely on consensus rather than authority. This paper analyses how the process maintained a purposeful trajectory towards change while accommodating input from all participants and complying with institutional requirements.  \nThe context of change  \nAs one of a small number of generalist undergraduate degrees at the University of Melbourne, the Bachelor  \nvol. 57, no. 2, 2015 Blurred boundaries Andrys Onsman & Clare Newton 37  \nA U S T R A L I A N U N I V E R S I T I E S ’ R E V I E W  \nof Environments has ten majors which bring together disciplines that deal with the built, natural, social and virtual environments in professions such as architecture, civil systems, construction, environmental engineering systems, environmental geography, environmental science, surveying, landscape architecture, landscape management, property and urban design and planning. It is unusual in that it is taught by staff from disparate faculties. Four faculties were ","cbCaicOIKq2zAJS9","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicOIKq2zAJS9","pdf",163415,"English","# The context of change\n## The expert participants\n## Interdisciplinary degree structure and governance\n# Negotiating a common core subject\n## Pedagogy-based vs strategy-based decisions\n## Propellants, retardants, and procedural constraints","[{\"question\":\"What change did the reviews recommend for the Bachelor of Environments?\",\"answer\":\"The reviews recommended reducing the number of common core first-year subjects to one.\"},{\"question\":\"Why was reaching consensus difficult across faculties?\",\"answer\":\"Consensus was hard because cross-faculty management structures relied on agreement rather than authority, while governance and resource control were structurally divided.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper distinguish pedagogy-based from strategy-based decisions?\",\"answer\":\"Pedagogy-based decisions prioritize student learning, retention, satisfaction, and curriculum coherence, while strategy-based decisions focus on maintaining or expanding academic territory, positions, influence, and control.\"}]","Blurred boundaries - Andrys Onsman & Clare Newton | PDF",23]