A Protocol for Minimalist Curriculum Mapping

Sama Agahi; Håkan Salwén

doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.13.33

Authors

Sama Agahi Stockholm University https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1804-4293
Håkan Salwén https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5764-7185

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.13.33

Keywords:

curriculum mapping, pedagogical analysis, digital tools in teaching, blended learning, supplemental instruction

Abstract

Curriculum mapping is a powerful tool that teachers and pedagogical developers can use to improve courses. It can, however, be both costly and time-consuming. This article describes a protocol for minimalist curriculum mapping that is easy to implement, highly flexible, and requires no specialized software. The described method is paired with the use of supplemental instruction, allowing access to high-quality information without the need to conduct interviews or distribute questionnaires. In the case described, minimalist curriculum mapping was used to determine the optimal use of digital tools for online courses. The protocol described can easily be adapted to serve other purposes. It can also be used without reliance on supplemental instruction. It is argued that this makes the protocol a simple and flexible way to reap some of the benefits of curriculum mapping without incurring all of the costs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Sama Agahi, Stockholm University

Sama Agahi (SWE) is a director of studies at the Department of Philosophy at Stockholm University. His research interests focus on logic and philosophy of logic. He is an associate of the European Centre for SI-PASS.

Håkan Salwén

Håkan Salwén (SWE) is an associate professor in practical philosophy at Stockholm University. His research focuses on questions in the philosophy of science, research ethics, and the philosophy of education.

References

Dawson, Phillip, Jacques van der Meer, Jane Skalicky, and Kym Cowley. 2014. “On the Effectiveness of Supplemental Instruction: A Systematic Review of Supplemental Instruction and Peer-Assisted Study Sessions Literature Between 2001 and 2010.” Review of Educational Research 84 (4): 609–39. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314540007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314540007

Easterbrook, Matthew J., and Ian R. Hadden. 2021. “Tackling Educational Inequalities with Social Psychology: Identities, Contexts, and Interventions.” Social Issues and Policy Review 15 (1): 180–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12070

Flanigan, Abraham E., Mete Akcaoglu, and Emily Ray. 2022. “Initiating and Maintaining Student-Instructor Rapport in Online Classes.” The Internet and Higher Education 53: 100844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100844. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100844

Getenet, Seyum, Robert Cantle, Petrea Redmond, and Peter Albion. 2024. “Students’ Digital Technology Attitude, Literacy and Self-Efficacy and Their Effect on Online Learning Engagement.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 21 (1): 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00437-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00437-y

Harden, R. M. 2001. “AMEE Guide No. 21: Curriculum Mapping: A Tool for Transparent and Authentic Teaching and Learning.” Medical Teacher 23 (2): 123–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120036547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120036547

Harrington, Christine. 2023. “Is the Syllabus Passé? Student and Faculty Perceptions.” Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 23 (4): 19–32. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v23i4.34371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v23i4.34371

Lam, Bick Har, and Kwok Tung Tsui. 2014. “Curriculum Mapping as Deliberation—Examining the Alignment of Subject Learning Outcomes and Course Curricula.” Studies in Higher Education 41 (8): 1371–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.968539

Lake, Danielle, Wen Guo, Elisabeth Chen, and Jacqui McLaughlin. 2024. “Design Thinking in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges for Decolonized Learning.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 12. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.12.4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.12.4

Le Cunff, Anne-Laure, Vincent Giampietro, and Eleanor Dommett. 2024. “Neurodiversity and Cognitive Load in Online Learning: A Focus Group Study.” PLoS One 19 (4): e0301932. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301932. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301932

Malm, Joakim, Leif Bryngfors, and Johan Fredriksson. 2018. “Impact of Supplemental Instruction on Dropout and Graduation Rates: An Example from 5-Year Engineering Programs.” Journal of Peer Learning 11 (1): 76–88. https://journalofpeerlearning.org/articles/84.

Mertens, Ute, Bridgid Finn, and Marlit Annalena Lindner. 2022. “Effects of Computer-Based Feedback on Lower- and Higher-Order Learning Outcomes: A Network Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Educational Psychology 114 (8): 1743. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000764

Owston, Ron, Dennis York, and Susan Murtha. 2013. “Student Perceptions and Achievement in a University Blended Learning Strategic Initiative.” The Internet and Higher Education 18: 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.003

Rawle, Fiona, Tracey Bowen, Barb Murck, and Rosa Hong. 2017. “Curriculum Mapping Across the Disciplines: Differences, Approaches, and Strategies.” Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching 10: 75–88. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4765

Sumsion, Jennifer, and Joy Goodfellow. 2004. “Identifying Generic Skills Through Curriculum Mapping: A Critical Evaluation.” Higher Education Research & Development 23 (3): 329–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235436. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235436

Wisniewski, Benedikt, Klaus Zierer, and John Hattie. 2020. “The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research.” Frontiers in Psychology 10: 487662. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087