Navigating murky curriculum waters
7 July 2015 HERDSA 2015, Melbourne
Navigating murky curriculum waters Using simple technologies and sector-relevant competencies to map a shared curriculum direction
Lynne Petersen, John Egan, Mark Barrow
Charting our time today … 1
Brief overview of the BHSc programme ~ programme & curriculum complexity
2
How we charted a direction through ‘unclear’ curriculum ~ threshold concepts & sector competencies
3
Deliberate choice to use familiar technologies for mapping ~ a focus on collaborative processes
4
Opportunities and impediments ~ wading through curriculum can be murky
5
Future plans, questions & discussion ~ next: sector & student engagement/feedback
1
BHSc overview: complexity !
Year 1 = 340 Year 2 = 262 Year 3 = 192 Total = 722 students This includes approx 140 conjoint students. Enrolments at June 2015
!
2
Charting a new ‘core’ direction Six connecting “thresholds” for the BHSc !
! !
Graduate Attributes • • •
4 Specialist Knowledge (previous 5) 5 General Intellectual Skills & Capacities 4 Personal Qualities & Professional Integrity
! !Graduate Competencies • • •
6 Intra- & Inter-personal Competencies 6 Cognitive Competencies 5 Communication, Collaboration, Advocacy, Citizenship Change & Project Management Competencies
Competencies unpacked: • • !
Generic Pathway-specific
3
Familiar tools to see and plot a path
4
Wading through murky waters Opportunities*
Impediments*
• Programmatic thinking via exposing of ‘generic’ (hidden) competencies
• Course-by-course thinking (Historical methods to deliver course curricula)
• Shared teaching & resource creation across stages
• Developing ‘backing’ in the midst of busy workloads
• Deliberate stair-casing of content i.e. ‘knowing’ what comes before (assessment)
• Ensuring changes in courses are aligned (i.e. don’t bring unintended consequences)
• Staff development regarding effective curriculum, teaching & assessment approaches
• How can we measure the effect of what we are doing? (impact on student learning)
*Key in this has been blending mandatory ‘top down’ with consultative ‘bottom up’ levers/ enablers for change (see Spronken-Smith et al., 2013 for more on enablers of change)
5
Future directions
!
Post!Grad! INTERN/ SHIPS!
Thanks. To continue the conversation, contact: Lynne Petersen University of Auckland, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences Learning Technology Unit [email protected] Acknowledgements: Associate Professor Peter Adams, Dr Peter Carswell, Co-Directors of the Bachelor of Health Sciences programme and academic and professional staff in the School of Population Health
Navigating murky curriculum waters Using simple technologies and sector-relevant competencies to map a shared curriculum direction
Lynne Petersen, John Egan, Mark Barrow
Charting our time today … 1
Brief overview of the BHSc programme ~ programme & curriculum complexity
2
How we charted a direction through ‘unclear’ curriculum ~ threshold concepts & sector competencies
3
Deliberate choice to use familiar technologies for mapping ~ a focus on collaborative processes
4
Opportunities and impediments ~ wading through curriculum can be murky
5
Future plans, questions & discussion ~ next: sector & student engagement/feedback
1
BHSc overview: complexity !
Year 1 = 340 Year 2 = 262 Year 3 = 192 Total = 722 students This includes approx 140 conjoint students. Enrolments at June 2015
!
2
Charting a new ‘core’ direction Six connecting “thresholds” for the BHSc !
! !
Graduate Attributes • • •
4 Specialist Knowledge (previous 5) 5 General Intellectual Skills & Capacities 4 Personal Qualities & Professional Integrity
! !Graduate Competencies • • •
6 Intra- & Inter-personal Competencies 6 Cognitive Competencies 5 Communication, Collaboration, Advocacy, Citizenship Change & Project Management Competencies
Competencies unpacked: • • !
Generic Pathway-specific
3
Familiar tools to see and plot a path
4
Wading through murky waters Opportunities*
Impediments*
• Programmatic thinking via exposing of ‘generic’ (hidden) competencies
• Course-by-course thinking (Historical methods to deliver course curricula)
• Shared teaching & resource creation across stages
• Developing ‘backing’ in the midst of busy workloads
• Deliberate stair-casing of content i.e. ‘knowing’ what comes before (assessment)
• Ensuring changes in courses are aligned (i.e. don’t bring unintended consequences)
• Staff development regarding effective curriculum, teaching & assessment approaches
• How can we measure the effect of what we are doing? (impact on student learning)
*Key in this has been blending mandatory ‘top down’ with consultative ‘bottom up’ levers/ enablers for change (see Spronken-Smith et al., 2013 for more on enablers of change)
5
Future directions
!
Post!Grad! INTERN/ SHIPS!
Thanks. To continue the conversation, contact: Lynne Petersen University of Auckland, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences Learning Technology Unit [email protected] Acknowledgements: Associate Professor Peter Adams, Dr Peter Carswell, Co-Directors of the Bachelor of Health Sciences programme and academic and professional staff in the School of Population Health
