Action Research for Graduate Program Improvements: A Response to Curriculum Mapping and Review

Abstract

There is a global trend toward improving programs and student experiences in higher education through curriculum review and mapping of degree programs. This paper describes an action research approach to program improvement for a course-based MEd degree. The driver for continual program improvement came from actions and recommendations that arose from an institutionally mandated, year-long, faculty led curriculum review of professional graduate programs in education. Study findings reveal instructors’ perceptions about how they enacted the recommendations for program improvement, including (1) developing a visual conceptualization of the program; (2) improved connections between the courses; (3) articulation of coherence in goals and expectations for students and instructors; (4) an increased focus on action research; (5) increased ethics support and scaffolding for students; and (6) the fostering of communities of practice. Study findings highlight strengths of the current program and course designs, action items, and research needed for continual program improvement.

The Role of Reflection in Action Research: Toward Enhanced Understandings of Curriculum Improvement

“…The analytical themes informed program improvements. Study findings revealed instructors' perceptions about how they enacted the recommendations for program improvement for teaching and learning, including: (1) developing a visual conceptualization of the program; (2) improved connections between the courses; (3) articulation of coherence in goals and expectations for students and instructors; (4) increased focus on action research; (5) increased ethics support and scaffolding for students; and (6) fostering communities of practice (Jacobsen et al, 2018). Some of the challenges were: time commitment, in particular, for part-time sessional instructors; idea negotiation as shaped through our different interpretive frameworks; redesign progression and the complexity of collaborating and balancing the sequencing of course pairings.…”

“…Our perspective includes the importance of reflecting on our action research approaches for program improvement within a research-intensive course-based MEd degree (Hendricks, 2016;Kemmis, McTaggart, & Nixon, 2014;MacDonald, 2012;McNiff, 2013McNiff, , 2014. The study gave detailed attention to the iterative process, which emerged from the curriculum review and mapping process for the four research courses for the MEd Interdisciplinary degree pathway (Jacobsen, Eaton, Brown, Simmons, & McDermott, 2018;Dyjur & Lock, 2016;McNay, 2009;Uchiyama & Radin, 2009). Steeped within four phases, comprised of: (1) planning; (2) observing and acting; (3) critical reflection; and (4) engaging in continuous iterations of this process, this paper reports specifically on our formal and informal team meetings to engage in a process of reflection over a 12 month period within our ongoing action research cycles.…”

Smart Curriculum Mapping and Its Role in Outcome-based Education

“…They have presented the continuous development methods based on flexibility and assistance, occurring in a program led by an annual organization headed by organized platforms [13].…”

A Rule-based Approach toward Automating the Assessments of Academic Curriculum Mapping

“…This research proposes that curriculum mapping can be a helpful tool for assessing how the students approved learning outcomes are aligned with the classes provided by the academic faculty. M Jacobsen, et al [26] presented the article on action research for graduate program improvements. They have presented continuous program improvement techniques derived from actions and suggestions, which emerged from a year-long faculty-led, institutionally approved evaluation curriculum of academic programs.…”