Given this background, it is useful to look at the state of the 
Department of Surveying and Land Information in 1993 and 
compare it to the current state of the Department of Geomatics. 
This exercise, it will be shown, need not be exhaustive in order 
to demonstrate that the goals of the transition have in large part 
been realised. In presenting this recollection the author 
contrasts the current healthy state of the Department of 
Geomatics with the somewhat precarious position of the 
surveying program at the time of the name change. 
It is noteworthy, as well, that not only a name change was 
involved. The transition to geomatics included a complete 
curriculum redesign to better reflect the broader base of the 
geomatics program. Accompanying the transition was the 
powerful onus to educate the general public and associated 
professions so that the perception was instilled that geomatics 
was not just another name for surveying, but essentially a new 
discipline concerned with spatial information measurement and 
management, of which surveying was simply one of a number 
of components. The purpose was never at any time to diminish 
surveying, but more to better encapsulate the broader scope of 
activities associated with geomatics. 
2. THE DEPARTMENT OF SURVEYING AND LAND 
INFORMATION, CIRCA 1993 
After a reasonable period of growth in the late 80s and early 
90s, the Department had the equivalent of nine full-time staff, 
about 180 undergraduate and 30 postgraduate students. In 
addition, it attracted grant and industry research funding to the 
level of $300,000 per annum. Although there was evidence that 
fewer graduates were entering the mainstream surveying 
profession, eligibility to become a Licensed Land Surveyor 
remained the only formal professional recognition for the 
degree in surveying. The degree was accredited by The 
Institution of Surveyors, Australia and by The Reciprocating 
Boards of Surveyors for Australia and New Zealand. 
Undergraduate students undertook one of three degree 
programs, a four-year degree in surveying (B.Surv), or one of 
two.five-year combined degrees with science (B.Surv/B.Sc) or 
arts (B.Surv/B.Arts). The combined degrees, although 
requiring both an "overload’ in terms of subjects taken and an 
extra year of study, were proving to be extremely popular. But, 
there was a problem: to undertake a combined degree the 
student’s entry score had to be very high (in the top 10% of 
incoming students). Surveying, however, was not drawing a 
sufficient number of such students. Hence the majority 
(approximately 70%) were only able to undertake the B.Surv. 
In order to rectify this situation, better student quality was a 
must. High university-wide entry standards also meant that 
many potential surveying students could not gain entry to the 
program. Surveying was in the unfortunate position of not 
being able to fill its quota with students having high enough 
entry scores. Poorer than expected progression rates and low 
course completion rates are a natural consequence of having a 
cohort of students who, when based on average entry scores, 
were at the lower end of the performance spectrum. 
Whatever the reason, such factors were drawing a good deal of 
concerned attention from within the University. The lingering 
question, which was fortunately not overtly expressed too 
frequently, was “if you cannot attract sufficient students of a 
quality demanded by the University of Melbourne, why should 
the University continue to offer the program?” Of course there 
were many good reasons to continue the program, yet these 
were increasingly losing their clout in the face of unfavourable 
statistics which influenced the program’s funding. The bottom 
line was clear: student quality had to improve, along with an 
increase in demand which would lead to higher student intakes. 
Although ongoing curriculum reviews had led to formal 
coverage of subjects such as GIS, spatial analysis, remote 
sensing and land management in the surveying degree program, 
it is fair to say that at the time it still had a dominant focus 
towards measurement science. Such a focus persisted even 
though developments in technology were changing the face of 
surveying at an ever increasing rate, and opportunities for 
graduates were emerging within the spatial IT sector. 
These factors were having a considerable impact on 
employment patterns for ‘surveying’ graduates. According to a 
survey conducted at the 1995 AURISA Annual Conference 
(Trinder & Li, 1997), close to 50% of graduates employed in 
the broader spatial information industry had received their 
formal education in ‘surveying’. The growth in the spatial 
information industry was fortuitous given that productivity 
improvements associated with new technologies were 
decreasing the need for surveyors, at the same time as a leveling 
off was occurring in the land development associated with the 
continued urban sprawl of major Australian cities. 
The combination of these and other factors meant that overall 
demand for traditional cadastral surveyors was diminishing, 
while at the same time new opportunities were opening up for 
graduates with skills in spatial information measurement and 
management. In a course promotions context the problem 
persisted that the general public (especially prospective students 
and their parents) associated ‘surveying’ with the diminishing 
opportunities of traditional surveying and not with the 
emergence of a whole new range of professional career 
possibilities in the spatial information industry. 
3. THE GEOMATICS PROGRAM IN 1999 
The picture in 1999 is certainly more positive in most respects 
than that of half a decade ago. The transition to Geomatics has 
produced immediate improvements in regard to student quality, 
and consequently numbers. The department now has the 
equivalent of 11 academic staff members, 9 full time research 
associates, between 190 undergraduate students (limited by 
quota) and 60 postgraduates. Moreover, the annual research 
budget is now close to $ 1.1 million. One of the features of the 
postgraduate student body is that the majority of students have 
a first degree other than geomatics. This is a reasonable 
indicator that the Department’s efforts to broaden its research 
focus to embrace new developments in spatial information are 
paying off.