The principle of ‘constructive alignment’ is central to curriculum design and development. Biggs (1999) describes teaching as a balanced system in which all
Curriculum design and development ❘ 47
Interrogating practice
When you are raising student awareness of learning outcomes for your course or programme, how do you ensure students understand these outcomes in the way you intend them to be understood?
components support each other. Biggs outlines the critical components of teaching as follows:
• the curriculum we teach;
• the teaching methods and strategies we use to facilitate student learning;
• the assessment processes we use and the methods of reporting results;
• the climate we create in our interactions with students;
• the institutional climate, the rules and procedures we are required to follow.
It must be taken as a given that whatever institution we are working in, we should understand the mission and the regulations. These are factors not within our control. We do of course have control over the classroom climate we create. Are we accessible to our students, appropriately supportive, approachable? These issues matter, and do have a bearing on how students respond and engage with learning.
The teaching, learning and assessment strategies are issues with which we need to engage in a scholarly manner. It is our role to ensure that the learning outcomes we agree upon are achievable, that we are clear about the levels or standards expected at different stages and that the learning tasks and the assessment of learning are in alignment. If we do not pay due attention to these issues, we may actually encourage surface learning.
The National Institute of Creative Arts and Industries is a Faculty of the University of Auckland. A key aim of the Faculty is to build a culture of interdisciplinarity and collaboration at both institutional level (between the five areas of architecture, art, dance, music and planning) and at the educational level (among the programmes taught to students). In 2007, the Faculty launched an initiative to promote the importance of drawing skills within the curriculum of all disciplines, at undergraduate level. A series of staff workshops was held to determine how best to do this, involving staff and students from different disciplines.
The first task of the staff workshop was to determine a set of achievable learning outcomes that would support a common curriculum in drawing, and could also be ‘exported’ to cognate disciplines outside the Faculty. The aim was to include outcomes and processes with clear cognitive, practical and affective dimensions that could be delivered within relatively few teaching hours.
Learning outcomes
The staff team devised a two-hour intensive teaching project on completion of which students would be able to:
48 ❘ Teaching, supervising, learning
Case study 1: Aligning teaching, learning and assessment with learning outcomes in the creative arts
• demonstrate a professional standard of drawing skills in a number of set tasks;
• understand and apply key drawing principles and methods;
• communicate confidence in their ability to be creative through the medium of drawing;
• show understanding of drawing not only as a creative art but also as a technical skill, a tool for experimentation and research, and a tool for presentation and communication of ideas;
• evaluate the quality of drawings used as informational tools within their own discipline;
• show understanding of drawing as a method for initiating, recording and developing ideas around which to build and manage a studio practice.
Alignment of teaching with learning outcomes
The ideas for the intensive teaching unit were tested in workshops with students from a range of disciplines, including engineering and business. Students were asked to bring along two drawings of a tree, one freehand and one digital, which were pinned on to the wall. They were then asked to execute a series of ‘small steps’ in drawing which illustrated simple but key principles of drawing practice;
at each stage outcomes were discussed, analysed and reflected upon by students.
Within two hours, by following the principles, each of the students was able to produce drawings of a professional – indeed, exhibition – standard. By comparing their final workshop drawings with their pre-workshop efforts, they were able to identify and evaluate key points of development. And, importantly, for the non- art students, they felt sufficiently competent to explore visual languages and creativity.
Interaction with students and formative assessment
In observing the student workshops, teaching staff were able to reflect upon the process of formative assessment within the studio environment, based on the interactions that took place between students and the workshop leader. Other points of importance were the use of the ‘small steps’ method; critical diagnosis of drawings; and a group dynamics of high energy, motivation and enjoyment – contributing to a level of concentrated work that produced excellent results.
Summative assessment was not a goal of the workshops, but could be incorporated within a fully developed drawing programme that concluded with exhibitions of works.
(Nuala Gregory, Creative Arts and Industry, University of Auckland) Curriculum design and development ❘ 49
There are a number of key steps to effective course and curriculum design. One model is as follows:
• Consider your general aims for the course/programme.
• Write specific learning outcomes (objectives): what do you want the students to learn?
• Plan the assessment framework to match your objectives.
• Plan the content, i.e. sequence of topics/readings.
• Plan the teaching/learning design – what kinds of activities will you and your students engage in together?
• Compile a list of resources.
• Write the course outline including readings.
• Consider evaluation of the course (formative and summative) and how best evaluation can be carried out.
It is important to bear in mind that the use of technology in teaching and learning is increasing all the time (Chapter 7). There is still some resistance to embedding the use of technology into the curriculum, with some academic staff believing it is more complex to design e-learning courses and programmes, or worse still believing that using tech- nology is a simple matter of transferring one’s course notes or PowerPoint presentations
‘on to the web’.
Whatever the context of learning (be it traditional classroom-based or distance learning, e-learning or blended learning) the purpose of the course or programme, the design, development and mode of delivery and associated assessment strategies must be carefully considered (Stefani, 2006), as in Case study 2.
The models of curriculum design described above indicate that assessment strategies should be considered once the intended learning outcomes have been agreed upon and articulated. Designing the curriculum in this manner may be considered to be a
‘logical’ model of curriculum development as opposed to a chronological model. In the
‘chronological’ approach, assessment may be seen as being something bolted on at the end of ‘content delivery’ as opposed to being an integral aspect of student learning.
A logical model of curriculum development
To support staff in visualising ‘the curriculum’, a model first presented by Cowan and Harding (1986) is generally very helpful. Figure 4.1 on p. 52 shows their original logical model of curriculum development, which is deserving of detailed explanation.
First, the grey area around the development activity diagram is not an accident. It has significance in that it represents the constraints within which any development operates, which can and should have a powerful impact on what is and what is not possible within the institutional and learning community context. Within this grey area, the arrows pointing inward indicate inputs from peers and other stakeholders such as employers or representatives of professional bodies who have a vested interest in the curriculum being provided.
50 ❘ Teaching, supervising, learning
Curriculum design and development ❘ 51
Case study 2: Course design and development
The University of Auckland has for a number of years offered a postgraduate certificate programme relating to learning and teaching. Completion of the Certificate in University Learning and Teaching (CULT) required presentation of a portfolio of evidence of reflection and scholarship on a range of topics. Course design and development was one of these topics and on the basis of my practice within my discipline I presented the following model of the Course Design Process.
Background Consider the institution, the Faculty and the Department (i.e the context for course design) Intended learning outcomes What the students can do at the end of the course
Expressed in active verbs
Must be specific and measurable
Assessment Both formative and summative elements Clear criteria established for assessment Explicitly linked to learning outcomes
Content Selected to support assessment and outcomes Depth/breadth selected according to outcomes Include skills as well as information
Course structure Number and type of teaching situations
Choose most appropriate for the students to master the content selected
Classroom Outcomes specified for each teaching session Plan topics and activities for each teaching session Choose most appropriate mode of interaction Evaluation Plan for how the course quality will be evaluated
Include multiple sources of evidence More than just student evaluations
(Sarah Henderson, Information Systems and Operations Management, University of Auckland)
The ‘how?’ and the ‘what?’ at each step in the development cycle also have significance.
These are intended to encourage us to think through the point that the form of the programme or module should depend more on the type of content and expectation and learning outcomes than the actual nature of it.
For example, if our intention is to facilitate learning in such a way that students’ abilities to analyse data, the method and approach taken, will have much in common with someone else who has a similar aim but within a different discipline, then ‘how’ is much more central to the design of the curriculum than ‘what’, which is particular to a discipline (Cowan, 2006, personal communication).
The model allows for and encourages an interrogation of ‘how’ to assess and ‘what’ to assess, how to facilitate learning and what sort of learning to encourage, and so on around the cycle.
A recent modification to this model is shown in Figure 4.2. This modified model puts learning outcomes at the centre of the development process, representing a minor change in the language reflecting aims and objectives for courses and programmes. The addition of the question ‘why?’ at each stage of the developmental process is intended to encourage staff to interrogate their classroom practice and to engage in reflection on curriculum development.
52 ❘ Teaching, supervising, learning
LEARNING OUTCOMES
analyse
EVALU ATION
assemble
how
TEACHING
what
how
LEARN ING
what why
how
ASSESSMENT
what why
DECISIONS
Figure 4.1 The logical model of curriculum development
Using such a model is intended to enable staff to define learning outcomes clearly and in accessible language that supports students in thinking through their own learning strategies. It is also intended to encourage academic staff to consider how they will facilitate student learning to achieve the intended learning outcomes.
This logical model of curriculum development sits well with Biggs’ model of alignment of teaching, learning and assessment (1999). There is much research to show that students tend to think about assessment first, rather than as their lecturers or tutors often do, as the last piece of course or curriculum development that needs to be considered. Biggs’
model outlining the differences in students’ versus staff perspectives on the curriculum is shown in Figure 4.3 on page 54.
Curriculum design and development ❘ 53
Figure 4.2 A modification to Cowan’s earlier model
LEARNING OUTCOMES
analyse
EVALU ATION
assemble
how
TEACHING
what
how
LEARN ING
what why
how
ASSESSMENT
what why
DECISIONS
Curriculum design in an e-learning environment
In today’s climate of embedding e-learning into the student learning experience, no chapter on curriculum design and planning would be complete without mention of learning activity design, or instructional design as it is often termed (see also Chapter 7).
Instructional design is defined as: the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction.
In essence the pedagogical principles of teaching and supporting student learning must be applied to the design and development of online or web-based modules, courses and programmes of study. Design is a useful term because it encompasses the entire process of analysis of learning needs and goals, and the development of a delivery system to meet those needs. It includes the development of learning materials, activities, practice elements (often using technology) and evaluation of all teaching and learning activities (Clark and Mayer, 2002).
54 ❘ Teaching, supervising, learning
Figure 4.3 Views of the curriculum
Source: Biggs (1999: 142). Reproduced with permission from the Open University Press Publishing Company.
Teaching activities
Learning activities Teacher perspective: objectives
Student perspective: assessment
assessment
outcomes
Interrogating practice
Using any of the curriculum development models shown above, work through any module or programme for which you have some responsibility and consider whether or not you have an appropriate alignment between the intended learning outcomes and the assessment strategies you currently adopt or intend to adopt.
We used a team approach, of academic staff supported by the University’s Centre for Academic Development (CAD), in the design and development of a curriculum for a Graduate Diploma of Theology qualification offered in an e-learning environment. Our potential students were university graduates who came new to the study of theology and e-learning but had previous learning and skills at advanced levels. Our main constraint was that the curriculum for the Graduate Diploma had to be drawn from the existing curriculum of the Bachelor of Theology programme which was delivered in a classroom environment.
Our challenge was to design a curriculum that could work with flexibility in e-learning situations where the courses did not rely on the cumulative effects of sequential learning but could offer an integrative experience of theology.
The courses were developed on the university e-learning platform which interfaced with the library catalogue and databases, the Student Learning Centre and other resources.
Learning outcomes, assessment and criteria
After identifying a selection of courses in the three subject areas of theology and planning an e-mode development timetable, we began designing courses by articulating the learning outcomes of each course and then relating the outcomes to appropriate assessment activities around which we eventually constructed criteria that directed students to the quality of their assessment activities in terms of deep learning, as well as to the literacy information skills needed to complete the assignment.
Content design and learning facilitation
We outlined the content topics that related to the learning outcomes and assessment activities of each course. Design decisions centred mainly on how best to transform topics into student e-learning experiences. As the academic team generated ideas for learning, the CAD team transformed them into audio and visual media components and the librarian searched out the electronic resources and created the course library pages.
The range of learning tasks and activities included in topics varied according to the level of the course. For example, in a level 1 course we built in teacher facilitation as a scaffold to learning by engaging students step by step in a theological process. At each step students participated in learning activities individually and in groups, such as guided reading, reflection and response to media, online group discussion and a weekly journal. Initially students received
Curriculum design and development ❘ 55
Case study 3: Module design for an e-learning environment in theology
formative feedback on their journal entries, but in the latter weeks of the course the entries were given assessed feedback.
In contrast, courses at levels 2 and 3 focused more on student-directed learning around a topic, case study, and so on. This required students individually and in groups to research, reflect, share resources, engage in critical discussion and integrative activities online in order to be able to complete their assessment activities.
E-learning student–teacher communication