Curriculum mapping
A possible technology-enhanced
curriculum review approach
South African Technology Network (SATN)
Conference, Bloemfontein
28-29 November 2011
1
Introduction
 Transformation
of higher education in
South Africa
 Relevance and responsiveness of HE
curricula
 Complex learning
 Curricula that sustain complex
learning ought to be ‘coherent and
progressive’
(Knight, 2001)
2
Key issues to consider







What do wish to achieve?
What do we teach?
Why do we teach what we
teach?
What do our students learn?
How do our students learn?
How do we assess what
students have learned?
How well should students
perform in these assessment
tasks to show that they have
achieved the intended learning
outcomes?
Intended and
planned curriculum
Taught and created
curriculum
Learned and
assessed curriculum
3
Focus of this paper




Two inter-related aspects of curriculum
mapping:
 mapping tool
 mapping process
Illuminate the pedagogic relationships within
a curriculum
Capture the dynamic interactions with
relevant stakeholders and its milieu
‘contextualised social practice’ (Cornbleth,
1990) not as an instrumentalist approach to
curriculum development and review
4
Outline of the presentation
Constructivist framework
 Past curriculum design practices at UoTs
 Lack of staff participation
 Teacher-centred technicist approach
 Case study of a career-oriented business
qualification
 Use of Curriculum mapping to steer the
curriculum review process and to engage
lecturing staff in reflective conversations
about pedagogic practice

5
Outcomes-based curriculum
development of Technikons in late 1990s
 National
Qualifications Framework
 A single national framework for learning
achievements
 Systemic change
 Outcomes-based
curricula
 Design-down curriculum design process of
working down from large, complex, workplaceorientated outcomes to specific, enabling
outcomes and tasks – responsive to needs of
employers
6
Technicist skills-based approach







Technikons responded to discourse of accountability
and efficiency
Modular subject structures to promote credit
accumulation and transfer
‘A narrow notion of skills’ (Allais, 2011)
‘Technical responsiveness’ ... ‘reduced to a
technicist one ...’ (McKenna & Sutherland, 2006)
Compliance mind-set of ‘process-oriented
administrative procedures’ (Breier, 2001)
DACUM – focus on functional task analysis
appropriate to specific occupation
Displacement of disciplinary knowledge
(Wheelahan, 2010)
7
Curriculum orientations of academic staff
Snyder, Bolin & Zumwalt in Shawer, Gilmore and Banks-Joseph (2008)
Fidelity
approach
• Centrally-controlled
model
Adaptation
approach
• Teacher adapt
curriculum to some
extent – curriculum
still centrally
controlled
• Teacher focuses on
limited adaptation to
suit the needs of
students
• Curriculum-adapter
Previous curriculum
development practices at
in SA
• Limited Technikons
evidence of
• Teacher focuses on
covering of subject
content
student engagement
Enactment
approach
• Engagement and
enactment of both
teacher and student
in teaching and
learning experiences
• Teacher responds to
needs of students by
creating a curriculum
• Curriculum-maker
• Curriculumtransmitter
Future practice requires a paradigm shift
towards
student-centred
learning
Before
1994
Late
1990s-before
HEQF
HEQF re-curriculation
8
Constructivist approach to
curriculum development & review
Biggs’s constructive alignment (2001)
‘learning is a process of
conceptual change
whereby individuals
construct new
understandings of
reality – a
constructivist point of
view’
McDonald & Van der Horst, 2007
‘A good teaching system
aligns teaching method
and assessment to the
learning activities
stated in the
objectives, so that all
aspects of this system
are in accord in
supporting appropriate
learning.’
9
Case study
(using subject guides/taught curriculum)
 Subjects
from a Business-related diploma
programme
 Organisational components of subject guide
 Pedagogical components of subject guide
 Data analysis and findings
 Omissions and oversight in terms of the core
components
 Constructive alignment – incomplete,
inconsistent or misaligned
 Lower level cognitive skills and tasks
 Insufficient integration of theory and practice
10
Constructive alignment template
Learning
outcomes
Teaching &
learning activities
Assessment
criteria
Assessment
methods
Deep and reflective conversations – preparatory
stage for developing curriculum maps
 One aspect that emerged from CA templates:
 Pertinent focus on occupational needs
 Increased emphasis on ‘doing’ rather than
‘knowing’ (Barnett et al. 2001)
 Absence of scaffolding of cognitive challenges

11
Curriculum mapping
What is a map?
A map is a visual
representation of an
area;
A symbolic depiction
highlighting
relationships between
elements
of that space such as
objects, regions, and
themes.
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map )
12
Curriculum mapping
What is a curriculum?
“… a sophisticated blend of educational
strategies, course content, learning outcomes,
educational experiences, assessment,
the educational environment and
the individual students’ learning style,
personal timetable
and programme of work.”
Harden, R.M. 2001. AMEE Guide 21: Curriculum mapping
a tool for transparent and authentic teaching and learning. Medical Teacher,
23(2):123-127.
13
What is a curriculum map?
“A diagrammatic representation
of the curriculum displaying
the different elements of
the curriculum and
the interrelationships between
these different elements”.
(Harden 2001, 125)
.
14
Key elements of a curriculum map
Knowing:
Disciplinary &
situated knowledge
Doing:
Practical skills
Being:
Personal
qualities &
capabilities
Learning
outcomes
Cognitive
complexity
Teaching
events
Subject
content
Level
descriptors
Learning
activities
Assessment
tasks
Adapted from Harden, 2001:125
15
Curtin University of Technology
CCMap 2010



Unit information;
Unit learning outcomes which
are aligned to the graduate
attributes and the
development of higher order
thinking skills;
Assessment (assessment
tasks by type, medium,
format, role of the student,
level of authenticity, level of
supervision, mode, purpose,
principle assessor and time
schedule);




Learning experiences
(type, duration,
frequency and
predominantly student
activity);
Learning resources
(type, use and cost to
student);
Curriculum themes
(linked to vision and
objectives of institution);
Career development
learning
16
Curtin University of Technology – Curriculum map template
17
Student learning experiences
Type
Clinical practice, fieldwork, laboratory work,
lectures, practical work, seminars, studio work,
tutorials, workshops, individual study & others
Duration
Hours, half-day, full-day and other
Frequency
Daily, 2,3,4 times per week, weekly,
fortnightly, monthly, twice a semester, once
a semester and other
Predominant types
of student
engagement
Listening & viewing &reading, writing, speaking,
reflecting, hands-on practice, listening & writing,
listening & writing & spearking, problem-solving
and other
18
Curtin University of Technology
Data available for analysis & discussion using CCMap 2010
19
Web-based curriculum mapping system
The use of a technology-enhanced process
provides:

‘an electronic trail of activities ... providing the
community with rich data sources from which
further reflective practice can emanate’
(Madiba, 2011)

A conceptual tool for curriculum review by
focusing on:
 Constructive alignment, cognitive demand,
coherence, logical sequencing, credit
allocation and the use of level descriptors.
20
Web-based curriculum mapping system
It provides ‘lines of inquiry’ of the intended, taught, experienced and
assessed curriculum at both subject, programme and institutional
level:

What are the intended learning outcomes?

What is taught and how is it taught?

What is assessed and how is it assessed?

What is the level of cognitive demand?

What are the gaps and redundancies in the curriculum?

Is there vertical and horizontal alignment of subjects within the
qualification?

What are the articulation and credit transfer possibilities between
programmes?

How are the concerns of academic staff addressed in terms of
curriculum change?
(Madiba, 2011)
21
Curriculum mapping
22
the overall aim is to develop
the conceptual as well as
the technical infrastructure
that will enable and
deepen institutional conversations
as far as curriculum is concerned;
and this is done on the premise of continuous
improvement of
teaching and learning and
curriculum delivery.”
(Madiba, 2011: 386)
“When curriculum mapping is adopted
as a process and project (tool)…
Situation analysis
with external
stakeholder
engagement
Comprehensive
review of existing
programme &
feedback from
current students
and staff
Identify gaps,
shortcomings,
redundancies
and suggestions
for improvement
Critical analysis
and evaluation of
existing
curriculum using:
Subject guides
Templates
Revise subject
guides & compile
preliminary
curriculum maps
Finalise curriculum
maps & develop final
subject guides for
approval &
implementation
Diagrams &
charts
Curriculum
mapping
process
Adapted from
Oliver, Jones, Ferns &
Tucker (2007)
23
What are the key benefits?
Gaining a holistic and comprehensive view of the
curriculum across all the subject areas and levels of
study.
 Acting as a mechanism to foster debate and reflection
on the key pedagogical issues amongst colleagues.
 Working across different layers (macro, meso and
micro) relevant to the HEQF re-curriculation process to
ensure coherence and cooperation.
 Assisting academics in creating unified, interdisciplinary
units of learning that foster students’ understanding of
concepts, ideas and activities across different subject
areas.

24
In conclusion …
Student-centred
Past curriculum
learning
development
approach
withpractices
curriculaatthat
Technikons
sustain complex
in late
learning
1990s

Technicist approach to curriculum
development
Displacement of knowledge in the
curriculum
Lack of academic staff
participation
Curriculum mapping
Curriculum mapping
as a process
Curriculum mapping
as a tool
Subject guides
Constructive alignment
template
25
List of selected sources




Allais, S. 2011. What are the skills? Reflections
on policy in South Africa in the light of
international debates. Paper presented at
the Global Labour University Conference, 2830 September 2011. University of the
Witwatersrand: Johannesburg.
Amer, A. 2006. Reflections on Bloom’s
Revised Taxonomy. Electronic Journal of
Research in Educational Psychology No. 8. 4
(1):213-230.
Barnett, R., G. Parry and K. Coate. 2001.
Conceptualising Curriculum Change.
Teaching in Higher Education 6 (4):435-449.
Breier, M. 2001. Higher education curriculum
development: the international and local
debates. Curriculum restructuring in higher
education in post-apartheid South Africa. Ed.
M. Breier. 1-37. Bellville: University of the
Western Cape.




Cornbleth, C. 1990.
Curriculum in context. New
York: The Falmer Press.
Curtin University of
Technology. 2010. Curtin
Curriculum Mapping Tool—
User Guide. Version 2 of 5
March 2010.
http://boliver.ning.com/page
/mapping-1 (accessed 4
August 2011].
Harden, R.M. 2001. AMEE
Guide no 21: Curriculum
mapping: A tool for
transparent and authentic
teaching and learning.
Medical teacher 23(2):123137.
James, D. 2005. Importance
and impotence? Learning,
outcomes and research in
further education. Curriculum
Journal 16 (1):83-96.
26
List of selected sources




Jansen, J.D. 1998. Curriculum Reform in
South Africa: a critical analysis of
outcomes‐based education.
Cambridge Journal of Education
28(3):321-331.
Knight, P.T. 2001.Complexity and
Curriculum: A process approach to
curriculum-making. Teaching in Higher
Education, 6(3):369-381.
Madiba, M. 2011. Curriculum mapping
as inquiry in higher education. In
Curriculum inquiry in South African
higher education: Some scholarly
affirmations and challenges. Bitzer EM
and MM Botha, eds. 381-398.
Stellenbosch: Sun Media.
McDonald, R. and H. Van Der Horst.
2007. Curriculum Alignment,
globalization and quality assurance in
South African education. Journal of
Curriculum Education 39 (1): 1-9.




McKenna, S. and L. Sutherland. 2006.
Balancing knowledge construction and
skills training in universities of
technology. Perspectives in Education
24(3): 15-24.
Oliver, B., Jones, S., Tucker, B., & Ferns,
S. 2007. Mapping curricula: ensuring
work-ready graduates by mapping
course learning outcomes and higher
order thinking skills. Peer-reviewed
paper presented at the Evaluations
and Assessment Conference, Brisbane.
http://www.eac2007.qut.edu.au/proce
edings/proceedings_ebook.pdf
[Accessed: 29 April 2010].
Shawer, S.F., Gilmore, D. & BanksJoseph, S.R. 2008. Student cognitive
and affective development in the
context of classroom-level curriculum
development. Journal of the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
8(1):1-28.
Wheelahan, L. 2010. Why knowledge
matters in curriculum: A social realist
argument. London: Routledge.
27
Any questions?
Mrs Marianne Bester
Fundani Centre for Higher Education
Development
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Tel. (021) 959 6468
E-mail: besterma@cput.ac.za
28