Curriculum planning for the development of graphicacy capability has not been systematically included in general education to coincide with the graphicacy needs of human society. In higher education, graphicacy curricula have been developed to meet the needs of certain disciplines, for example medical and teacher training and engineering, among others. A framework for graphicacy curricula, anticipating the graphicacy needs in higher education, has yet to be strategically planned for general education. This is partly a result of lack of research effort in this area, but also a result of lack of systematic curriculum planning in general. This paper discusses these issues in the context of graphicacy curricula for engineering. The paper presents three broad individual case studies spanning Europe and the USA, brought together by the common denominator, graphicacy. The case studies are based on: an analysis of graphicacy within general education curricula, an analysis of graphicacy for engineering education in Europe and an analysis of graphicacy for engineering education in the USA. These three papers were originally presented in a plenary session at the American Society for Engineering Education, Engineering Design Graphics Division at the University of Limerick in November 2012. The case studies demonstrate the potential for strategic curriculum planning in regard to the development of graphicacy in general education and an overview of a methodology to achieve that. It also offers further evidence towards the importance of the systematic classification of graphics capabilities in Engineering and how the lack of a developed theoretical framework in this area undermines the case for the importance of graphics within engineering education.