The curriculum serves as a key point of visibility for the work performed through partnerships forged between representatives of a higher education provider and various student, community and/or industry stakeholders. Conceptions of what constitutes quality curriculum are contestable and informed by much more than quality assurance requirements. They are inevitably reliant upon localised definitions of aspirational, acceptable or normative practice in curriculum design. Contemporary discourses of constructive alignment and backwards design arguably engender curriculum design stakeholders to construct system-based conceptions of quality. These are emergent from examining the relationship between each component or element (e.g. intended learning outcomes, assessment tasks and learning activities) in a qualification or unit of study.
It can be difficult for a stakeholder collective to develop mutually understood system-based conceptions of quality curriculum, when the curriculum is represented in a linear top to bottom document format. Working within the constraints of a linear format, curriculum designs are often represented using mapping tables where a relationship is confirmed using binaries, numbers, ticks/crosses or simplistic schemas. These representations of curriculum often require readers to develop a temporary system diagram to commence examining the efficacy of each relationship, thus exacerbating the already difficult act of collaborative curriculum design.
In this workshop, participants will be introduced to a series of openly licensed learning design processes that serve as a graphical workspace for academics to design and review the efficacy of unit assessment design. Similar to the role of house plans in the design, approval and construction of a residence, learning designs serve as a reference point for stakeholders with differing perspectives to negotiate and formulate ways of ensuring quality outcomes. Workshop participants will use various learning designs to review and provide formative feedback on a unit level curriculum design, using a review triad of relevance, quality and efficiency.