2016•South African Journal of Higher EducationOpen access

Mapping our way to coherence, alignment and responsiveness

Marianne Bester

Open full text 9 citations

Abstract

Transformation of higher education in South Africa has resulted in an ongoing need to reflect critically on the relevance and responsiveness of higher education curricula. If we argue that higher education curricula is about complex learning, then it is important to ask: How do we as higher education lecturers create curricula that would provide students with meaningful learning experiences as they progress along their higher education journey? Knight (2001, 370) argues that curricula that sustain complex learning ought to be ‘coherent and progressive’, emphasising that the key elements of a curriculum such as subject content, intended learning outcomes, teaching, learning and assessment strategies and methods should be closely aligned. We shall argue in this paper that curriculum mapping, both as a process and a tool will encourage higher education lecturers to consider these key issues when designing curricula: • What do we teach? • Why do we teach what we teach? • What do our students learn? • How do our students learn? • How do we assess what students have learned? • How well should students perform in these assessment tasks to show that they have achieved the intended learning outcomes? These questions relate to the three levels of a curriculum, namely the intended (planned), the taught (created) and the learned (experienced).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Transformation of higher education in South Africa has resulted in an ongoing need to reflect critically on the relevance and responsiveness of higher education curricula. If we argue that higher education curricula is about complex learning, then it is important to ask: How do we as higher education lecturers create curricula that would provide students with meaningful learning experiences as they progress along their higher education journey? Knight (2001, 370) argues that curricula that sustain complex learning ought to be ‘coherent and progressive’, emphasising that the key elements of a curriculum such as subject content, intended learning outcomes, teaching, learning and assessment strategies and methods should be closely aligned. We shall argue in this paper that curriculum mapping, both as a process and a tool will encourage higher education lecturers to consider these key issues when designing curricula: • What do we teach? • Why do we teach what we teach? • What do our students learn? • How do our students learn? • How do we assess what students have learned? • How well should students perform in these assessment tasks to show that they have achieved the intended learning outcomes? These questions relate to the three levels of a curriculum, namely the intended (planned), the taught (created) and the learned (experienced).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Transformation of higher education in South Africa has resulted in an ongoing need to reflect critically on the relevance and responsiveness of higher education curricula. If we argue that higher education curricula is about complex learning, then it is important to ask: How do we as higher education lecturers create curricula that would provide students with meaningful learning experiences as they progress along their higher education journey? Knight (2001, 370) argues that curricula that sustain complex learning ought to be ‘coherent and progressive’, emphasising that the key elements of a curriculum such as subject content, intended learning outcomes, teaching, learning and assessment strategies and methods should be closely aligned. We shall argue in this paper that curriculum mapping, both as a process and a tool will encourage higher education lecturers to consider these key issues when designing curricula: • What do we teach? • Why do we teach what we teach? • What do our students learn? • How do our students learn? • How do we assess what students have learned? • How well should students perform in these assessment tasks to show that they have achieved the intended learning outcomes? These questions relate to the three levels of a curriculum, namely the intended (planned), the taught (created) and the learned (experienced).

Key concepts: Curriculum, Higher education, Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy), Relevance (law), Mathematics education, Process (computing), Pedagogy, Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Mapping our way to coherence, alignment and responsiveness — Research Paper | ScholarLens