Redesigning Natural Resources Curricula: A Redesign Process Model at Texas A&M University

Abstract

Core Ideas An undergraduate natural resources education is improved at a major research university. The article describes a systematic curriculum redesign process in a university program. The program is improved by using data‐driven program design and assessment. The undergraduate curriculum is focused to ensure program and graduate quality based on industry/academic needs and trends. To remain current, departments and programs offering curricula in natural resource science aim to ensure that students develop the knowledge and skills identified as being crucial by experts in the field. Texas A&M University's Ecosystem Science and Management (ESSM) Department recently completed a large‐scale curricular update assisted by academic developers at the Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE) within the university. Using the comprehensive Program (Re)Design (PRD) model created by the CTE academic developers, the ESSM Department began by forming a PRD team identified from the department's faculty. This article details the process that the ESSM department utilized during their curriculum update, and provides a general overview of the PRD model. Examples of lessons learned (issues, solutions, and so forth) are also examined.

Process for Faculty-Driven, Data-Informed Curriculum Continuity Review in Biomedical Engineering

“…Moreover, numerous biomedical engineering programs are due for their second, third, or fourth major curriculum redesigns. According to Fowler et al, ''a decade is the average time frame that sees major changes in industry, attitudes within the discipline, and student composition'' 24 and is, thus, the average time frame for significant curriculum updates. This 10-year time span agrees with the conclusion of Wright, who states that scientific and engineering knowledge doubles every ten years.…”

“…Before changes are made to a curriculum, curriculum continuity maps are often constructed to systematically and visually ascertain gaps, redundancies, and bottlenecks in the content and sequencing of courses. 1,12,17,23,24,31,38,40,47,53 Curriculum continuity falls in the curriculum development step of Wolf's continuous improvement model for curriculum development. 51 Curriculum maps assist in ensuring a coherent, integrated, and meaningful curriculum; informing curriculum enhancements; and confirm good educational practices of curriculum development (i.e., continued, steady, systematic, and incremental) are followed.…”

“…51 Curriculum maps assist in ensuring a coherent, integrated, and meaningful curriculum; informing curriculum enhancements; and confirm good educational practices of curriculum development (i.e., continued, steady, systematic, and incremental) are followed. 1,12,17,23,24,40,47,53 According to Veltri et al, a distinctive characteristic of the curriculum continuity map framework is it is intentionally designed to capture the degree of curriculum continuity by systematically exploring relationships between and among curriculum components through the double lens of outcomes integration and alignment between curriculum components. 48 There are several models available for engineering disciplines to assess the curriculum continuity, including mapping course learning outcomes against specific knowledge areas 40 or mapping course learning outcomes against curriculum or program outcomes (knowledge, technical, and professional skills).…”

“…1,17,31,32,38,48 The later model is used for the C 3 P described herein, but Knight does warn that it is often difficult to find the balance in outcome granularity as some student learning is difficult to succinctly write into a learning outcome. 29 The level of granularity for curriculum outcomes varies and has reportedly included 5, 32 , 8, 38 10, 48 11, 24 13, 1 22, 48 or 24 23,17 curriculum or program outcomes. The C 3 P reported here employs 23 curriculum outcomes.…”

“…The C 3 P is conducted using a deliberate processoriented approach (Figure 1B) that is faculty-driven, data-informed using a mixed-methods approach (Table 1) and involving multiple stakeholders, and educational development-supported. 15,25,29,30,51 The process aligns with the curriculum visioning and curriculum development process espoused by Wolf 51 and adapted by others 12,17,24,25…”