Curriculum Development and Approval at Mohave College

Curriculum development at Mohave College utilizes the Backward Design framework from Understanding by Design written by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe (1998). The approach has faculty determine the student learning outcomes of the course first. Once the learning outcomes have been established, the corresponding objectives are defined, followed by the development of appropriate assessment measures.

When determining appropriate assessment measures, it is essential to identify the key assessment(s) that effectively measure the attainment of the learning outcomes. This intentional course and program design are a common approach known as constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang, 2022). In constructive alignment, learning outcomes, learning experiences, and assessment tasks work together to mutually reinforce and build towards achievement of course and program student learning outcomes. Once learning outcomes and assessment measures are determined, the learning activities, teaching methods and resources to achieve those outcomes may be planned. There are three important steps to Backward Design planning:

1. Identify learning outcomes.
2. Determine assessment measures of the learning outcomes.
3. Plan instruction and learning experiences. 

References:

Biggs, J., Tang, C., & Kennedy, G. (2022). Teaching for Quality Learning at University (5th ed.). McGraw Hill.
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (2nd ed.). Pearson.

Writing and aligning Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and objectives is an essential process that ensures clarity and consistency in teaching and assessment. SLOs define what students should know or be able to do by the end of a course or program, while objectives further break down and identify the knowledge and/or skills that will help achieve those outcomes.

To create measurable outcomes, educators can utilize Bloom’s Taxonomy, which categorizes cognitive skills into a hierarchy ranging from lower-order thinking skills to higher-order skills. This framework not only helps in formulating clear and specific outcomes but also ensures that students are engaged in increasingly complex thinking processes throughout their learning journey. Additionally, integrating Depth of Knowledge (DOK) helps to understand the cognitive demand and rigor inherent in the student learning outcomes. DOK categorizes tasks based on the complexity of thinking required, ranging from recall of facts (Level 1) to strategic thinking and reasoning (Level 3) and extended thinking (Level 4). By understanding the DOK level of a learning outcome, educators can design instructional activities and assessments that match that level of cognitive demand and better prepare students for real-world applications and foster deeper understanding. Together, Bloom’s Taxonomy and Depth of Knowledge provide a robust framework for developing comprehensive and effective SLOs, ensuring that all students are equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary for success.

To create a clear and effective roadmap for both teaching and learning, educators should ensure that each course objective directly supports the Course Student Learning Outcomes (CSLOs). In turn, the Course Student Learning Outcomes should directly support the Program Student Learning Outcomes (PSLOs). This alignment not only enhances instructional processes but also provides a framework for assessing student progress and success throughout the program, fostering a more cohesive educational experience.

Identifying key assessments for Course and Program Student Learning Outcomes in higher education requires a systematic approach to evaluate how well students achieve the desired outcomes. Key assessments are specific tools or methods used to measure student learning against established outcomes, providing important evidence of student understanding and skill acquisition. This process includes aligning assessments with specific learning outcomes, utilizing a variety of methods such as exams, projects, and presentations, and ensuring they reflect real-world applications of knowledge.

Faculty collaborate to analyze data from these assessments to identify strengths and areas for improvement, ultimately enhancing the educational experience and ensuring that students are well-prepared for their future endeavors. By focusing on targeted assessments, institutions can foster a culture of continuous improvement and accountability in student learning.

Curriculum mapping is an effective planning tool for articulating and aligning learning outcomes across a sequence of courses. It clearly delineates the level of mastery of Program Student Learning Outcomes (PSLOs) within each course and specifies the timing of assessment. Curriculum mapping provides the framework and opportunity to examine assessment measures included throughout the program, ensuring alignment with the intended PSLOs. The assessment measures are designed to assess Course Student Learning Outcomes (CSLOs) aligned to PSLOs and should be representative at the appropriate level of mastery. Each course can then be examined individually to ensure that the learning mastery is building towards the identified PSLOs. This holistic approach guides assessment in individual courses to ensure systematic collection of evidence for program assessment.

Example:

	Program Student Learning Outcome #1	Program Student Learning Outcome #1	Program Student Learning Outcome #1	Program Student Learning Outcome #1
Course 1	I, R, M Exam*		I
Course 2	R	I	R Case study*	I
Course 3	R	R Project*	R	R
Course 4	M	M	M	M Project/Presentation*

I  Introduced: Outcome is achieved at an introductory level, foundation knowledge.

R  Reinforced: Outcome is reinforced, assuming it is introduced in a previous course.

M  Mastered: Outcome is mastered or met, usually assuming it is introduced/reinforced in prior courses.

Key Assessment*: Indicates a course assessment and where in the program the PSLO is assessed.

Purpose: The committee is an interdisciplinary instructional (curricular) group, in consultation with the non-instructional (co-curricular) group, charged with reviewing, evaluating, and making recommendations to the President’s Cabinet. The Curriculum Committee conducts its work under the auspices of the college President and within college Policies and Procedures.

Committee Proceedings

Faculty develop or modify curriculum in their area of expertise by using the Backward Design framework, assessment data and/or advisory councils. Faculty make curricular changes and submit proposals within the curricular approval software, Modern Campus Curriculum. Within the software system and through the approval workflow, Curriculum Committee members review and provide documented feedback on the proposals. The Committee holds monthly meetings for curriculum proposal presentations, discussions regarding proposals, and vote for approval.  Once the proposal is approved, the proposal continues through the workflow for final approvals before being instated as active curricula.

Curriculum Approval Track

For items to be placed on the Curriculum Committee meeting agenda, they must be submitted in Modern Campus Curriculum as outlined below on the calendar. This allows time for non-instructional and curriculum reviews through the curriculum approval workflow.

Note: Due to the review process, submission due dates do not guarantee placement on the next scheduled Curriculum Committee agenda.

Modern Campus Curriculum Login

Curriculum Committee Deadlines and Dates

For example: To view the course package for English 101, select E-G, then select ENG 101.

The spreadsheets include the relevant dates (e.g., date renewed, next renewal date) associated with each course. Each course package link provides the course design, including course student learning outcomes, competencies, and outline. Please note that some course packages may contain dated textbook and software information. For the most current textbook and software application information, please access myMohave.

A-B

C-D

E-G

H-M

N-R

S-Z