Advertisement

Informaticians and informatical professionals: a conceptual framework

  • Tom J. van Weert
Chapter
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT)

Abstract

What informatics knowledge do noninformatics majors need? To answer this question the relationship between informatics and other disciplines must be clear. This relationship is dependent on which view of the world is taken. Here we take the view that the world of informatics regards systems of interacting processes. From this view follows a relationship between informatics and other disciplines. This relationship allows derivation of competencies needed by noninformatics majors from competencies needed by informatics majors. First a terminology set is presented. Then a conceptual framework is developed which makes a distinction between informatics as a discipline and so-called informatical disciplines as well as between informaticians and so-called informatical professionals. Finally a common core of informatics is identified.

Keywords

Informatics other disciplines noninformatics majors curriculum (core) educational profiles 

References

  1. Commissie Hoger Onderwijs InformaticaPlan (1986) Eindrapport. HBO-Raad, Den Haag, 13–16 [in Dutch].Google Scholar
  2. Coulter, N.S. [ed.] (1991) Update to the Computing Reviews Classification System. Computing Reviews, 32 (1), 5–50.Google Scholar
  3. Denning, P.J. et al. (1989) Computing as a discipline. Communications of the ACM, 32 (1), 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gould, H. [ed.] (1971) IFIP Guide to concepts and terms in data processing. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993) Re-engineering the corporation. Nicolas Brealy Publishing, London.Google Scholar
  6. Mulder, F. and Hacquebard; A.E.N. (1998) Specifying and comparing informatics curricula through UCSI, in Informatics in higher education: Views on informatics and noninformatics curricula (eds. F. Mulder and T.J. van Weert ), Chapman & Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Shaw, M. (1991) Informatics for a new century: computing education for the 1990’s. Special issue of Education & Computing, 7, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Van Weert, T.J. (1988) Literacy in the Information Age, in Children in the Information Age (eds. B1. Sendov and I. Stanchev), Pergamon Press, Oxford, 109–122.Google Scholar
  9. Van Weert, T.J. (1992) Application Oriented Informatics and Informational Disciplines: A symbiosis bridging the gap, in Information Processing 92, Volume I1 (ed. R. Aiken ), Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam, 144–150.Google Scholar
  10. Weber, J. et al. (1994) Visualising microscopic molecular worlds in chemical education, in Visualisation in scientific computing: Uses in university education (eds. S. Franklin and A. Stubberud ), Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam, 9–24.Google Scholar
  11. Wegner, P. (1997) Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms. Communications of the ACM, 40 (5), 80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wupper, H. and Meijer, H. (1998) Towards a taxonomy for computer science, in Informatics in higher education: Views on informatics and non informatics curricula (eds. F. Mulder and T.J. van Weert ), Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom J. van Weert
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Informatics, Faculty of Mathematics and InformaticsUniversity of NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations