Download - Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
1/19
International Journal for Academic Development
Vol 9, No. 1, May 2004, pp. 5165
ISSN 1360144X (print)/ISSN 14701324 (online)/04/01005115
2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd
DOI 10.1080/1360144042000296053
An Integrated Approach to Developing and
Implementing Learning-centred Curricula
Harry Hubball*and Helen BurtUniversity of British ColumbiaTaylorand FrancisLtdRIJA100093.sgm10.1080/1360144042000296053InternationalJournalfor AcademicDevelopment0000-0000(print)/0000-0000(online)OriginalArticle2004Taylor& [email protected]
The purpose of this article is to provide a critical review of the motivating factors, processes and outcomes
pertaining to learning-centred curriculum reform in higher education. A case study example is provided from
the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of British Columbia. Although academic units on
university campuses tend to present many unique contextual challenges, and are at different stages in curric-
ulum re-design, useful lessons can be learned across settings without re-inventing the wheel, or falling into
similar implementation problems. A flexible framework, guiding principles and strategic approach to develop-
ing and implementing learning-centred curricula are provided to assist academic developers. Curricular
reform has implications for learning communities, planning, assessment and programming in higher
education.
Introduction: Curricular Reform as a Process of Transition in Higher Education
Over the past decade, in many parts of the world, universities, faculties, schools and depart-
ments in higher education have been undergoing significant curricular reform (Ganderton,
1996; Gibbons, 2000; Green, 1995; Mok, 1999). Globally, critical factors around university
campuses influencing this process, include:
social and economic challenges which call for increasing efficiency and accountability,
while responding to the pressures of increasing student enrolment, shrinking budgets,
competition and having to do more with less in higher education; (Daniel, 1993;
Schneider & Shoenberg, 1999)
significant pedagogical shifts from teaching-centred to learning-centred approaches; (Barr& Tag, 1995; Jansen & Christie, 1999)
increasing importance of Prior Learning Assessment (PLA), attributes of graduates and learn-
ing outcomes, interdisciplinarity, interprofessionalism, internationalisation, work-based
*Corresponding author. Harry Hubball, Ph.D., Department of Curriculum Studies, 2125 Main Mall,
Faculty of Education, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Email:
RIJA100093.fm Page 51 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
2/19
52 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
learning, educational technologies, and credit accumulation and transfer; (Shulman, 1999;
Trowler, 1996)
triggering opportunities (Ewell, 1997; Knight & Trowler, 2000). For example, university
initiatives to re-define the purpose of undergraduate education, external reviews, staffing/
funding/programming crisis).
The sheer nature and scope of these factors continue to pose considerable challenges to insti-
tutions, curriculum committees and faculty members responsible for curricula design and
implementation. Not surprisingly, therefore, there have been a wide range of interpretations,
practices and reactions to learning-centred curricula reform (Drummond, Nixon, & Wiltshire,
1998; Green, 1999; Kemp & Seagraves, 1995). At the University of British Columbia (UBC),
Canada, for example, prompted by a strategic institutional visioning process and subsequent
development of an Academic Plan (VP Academic and Provost, 2000), all academic units on
campus have been challenged to re-examine their curriculum and pedagogical practices in the
context of the Universitys explicit goals and commitment toward learning and undergraduate
education. Although academic units on university campuses tend to present many unique
contextual challenges, and are at different stages in curriculum re-design, useful lessons can be
learned across settings without re-inventing the wheel, or falling into similar implementa-
tion problems. This paper provides a case study example of the motivating factors, processes
and outcomes pertaining to curriculum reform within the UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical
Sciences. A flexible framework, guiding principles and strategic approach to implementing
learning-centred curricula are provided to assist academic developers in higher education.
Learning-centred Curricula
Although not an entirely new concept in higher education, a learning-centred approach to
curricular reform is part of a larger process of educational change (Hubball & Poole, in press).
In order to meet the diverse needs and circumstances of learning communities, no singular
curriculum model, implementation strategy, nor approach to learning will suit all academic
settings. The underlying assumptions about a learning-centred approach to curricular reform
are that: representative students, faculty, and stakeholders in the broader context should be
active participants in the curricular reform process; that academic units are at different stages
in curricular reform and progress at different rates; that curricular reform should honour
inclusion of a wide range of teaching and learning strategies; and that curricular reform within
an academic unit is both an individual and social contextual process (Barab & Duffy, 2000;Barr & Tag, 1995; Gold, 1997; Kupperschmidt & Burns, 1997; Schneider & Schoenberg,
1999; Shulman, 1999).
Essentially, learning-centred curricula place emphases on learning communities, curriculum
integration, diverse pedagogiesand clearly defined learning outcomes. Learning outcomes focus on
what students are expected to know and be able to do (for example, demonstrate critical
thinking, responsible use of ethical principles, problem-solving skills) in the context of a field
of study, and are designed to be assessable, transferable, and relevant to learners lives as
workers and citizens in a diverse world (Baron, 1996; Battersby, 1997; Clanchy & Ballard,
1995; Kanpol, 1995). In addition, the following benefits present a compelling rationale for
curricula developed from a learning-centred approach:
RIJA100093.fm Page 52 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
3/19
Learning-centred Curricula 53
1. informs learners of what they can expect to achieve from a program, so they can organise
their time and efforts;
2. communicates curriculum/program goals in a meaningful way to a broader community;
3. outcomes-based curriculum helps to determine the extent to which learning has been
accomplished;
4. guides curriculum committees (within resource constraints) to determine program(s) of
study and course offerings;
5. guides instructors when they are designing course objectives, content, delivery and assess-
ment strategies.
In practice, learning-centred curricula require a community of students/learners to be able to
make choices within a responsive (that is, to diverse learners needs, critical teaching and
learning issues and available resources) carefully structured, and guided learning environ-
ment. Thus, in the broader context of significant educational reform, and in order to respond
to the diverse needs and circumstances of students, faculty and society, the UBC Faculty of
Pharmaceutical Sciences, embarked on a process to re-design and implement a learning-
centred curriculum.
An Integrated Approach to Developing and Implementing Learning-centred
Curricula
The processes of developing and implementing learning-centred curricula are complex and
intricately inter-related, that cannot be treated as discrete entities, nor can they each be
considered the responsibility of completely different people. Kupperschmidt and Burns
(1997) suggested that focusing on curriculum revision as a process of transition (that is,
requires a period of incremental adaptation) rather than radical change may help alleviate
faculty anxiety or resistance. An integrated approach to developing and implementing learn-
ing-centred curricula combines both pedagogical and organisational change strategies
(Diamond, 1997, 1998; Erickson, 2002; Fullan, 2001; Green & Kreuter, 1999; Murphy,
1997; Perrier, Stinson & Milter, 1996; Pietersen, 2002; Wiles & Bondi, 2002; Winslade,
Pugsley, Lavack, & Strand, 1995).
A conceptual framework (Figure 1) and a strategic approach was applied to curriculum
reform in the UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences. This flexible and iterative organisa-
tional framework takes into account the learning context, and integrates comprehensive strat-
egies for curriculum reform in higher education.Figure1. Anintegratedframework fordevelopingand implementinglearning-centredcurriculai nhighereducation: Implicationsfor learningcommunities,planning, assessmentandprogramming
Practical strategies (Tables 14) for each component of the framework were drawn from a
combination of literature sources and specific experiences (focus group interviews, workshop
assignments, discussion fora) with curriculum committees from a wide range of UBC facul-
ties engaged in curriculum reform. Essentially, this framework provides (i) a benchmark for
an analysis of needs to determine the current status of curriculum within an academic unit,
(ii) guidelines for direction and progression in the curriculum re-design process, and (iii)
strategies for implementation.
Learning context strategiesrefer to critical implementation initiatives (for example, adequate
support; leadership qualities; teamwork; representative input; responsiveness, incentives and
sources of reward) that empower the learning community (collectively and individually) to
RIJA100093.fm Page 53 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
4/19
54 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
engage in curriculum re-design (Baker, 1999; Barab & Duffy, 2000; Cox, 2001; Gold, 1997;
Middendorf, 1999; Nolinske, 1999). Planning strategies refer to the development of global
(overall curriculum) and specific (program-specialisation) learning outcomes (for example,
critical thinking, responsible use of ethical principles, communication skills) which, in part,
drive the curricula, teaching and learning process (Baird, 1996; Clanchy & Ballard, 1995;
Lockhart & Borland, 2001). Assessment strategies refer to the development of a range of
methods (for example, capstone projects, portfolios, student presentations, exams) and
procedures used to assess and evaluate student learning and curriculum effectiveness
(processes, impact and outcomes) (Adamcik, Hurley, & Erramouspe, 1996; Brown, Bull, &
Pendlebury, 1997; Diamond, 1998; Shavelson & Huang, 2003); and programming strategies
refer to the development and integration of diverse learning strategies (for example, interdis-
ciplinary/core learning modules, intra-program specialisation modules, and individual course
work modules - learning technologies, problem-based learning, lectures, independent study
and field experiences) in which students can acquire, integrate and apply knowledge indiverse settings (Brandt, Clements, & Piascik, 1998; Clarke & Hubball, 2001; Raman-Wilms,
2001; Poindexter, 2003).
Stage-specific Intervention Strategies
While the curriculum development team was sensitive to addressing all components of the
curriculum re-design framework at all times during the reform process, it is important to note
that the UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences (like various other UBC faculties, schools
and departments) progressed through critical stages of curriculum reform, albeit at different
rates. There was firstly an awareness stage (aware of groundswell of curricular reform in
Figure 1. An integrated framework for developing and implementing learning-centred curricula in higher
education: Implications for learning communities, planning, assessment and programming
RIJA100093.fm Page 54 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
5/19
Learning-centred Curricula 55
alternative settings though no real energy or resources committed to curriculum change)
Secondly there was an initiative stage (interest and commitment toward curriculum reform,
initiate Chair and key personnel to spearhead process); then a mobilisation stage(mobilise and
empower learning community for curriculum reform, establish curriculum committee, and
sub-committee working groups for strategic planning). This was followed by an action plan
Table 1. Implementing learning-centred curricula: Practical strategies for learning context
Learning context strategies
Curriculum redesign requires active support (financial, organisational, political) from Heads/administration.
Effective leadership qualities of the Chair to engage the learning community are critical. Re-examine
institutional visioning documents, accreditation requirements and/or expectations of the field regarding
ability-based outcomes. Develop strong rationale and priority for curriculum re-design. Elevate status,
reward and accountability for effective teaching within the academic unit.
Chair should seek input from stakeholders and conduct a comprehensive needs assessment to record
current status of curriculum, available resources, vision, challenges, and input regarding expected learning
outcomes on completion of a program of study. The buy-inownership. Ensure curriculum re-design is
an open and inclusive process versus closed process administered by a select few. If necessary, consider a
new, interactive and influential committee (inclusive of stakeholders), provide adequate support/time &workshop assistance. Develop short, intermediate and long-term curriculum goals.
Develop overall integration (vertical and horizontal) model for program specializations, as well as provide
autonomy for specialisations to develop appropriate course offerings within curriculum. Reinforce
learning-centred principles and benefits for graduates of faculty. Acknowledge complexity/challenge of
curriculum re-design. Make visible available resources, constraints, and progress (e.g., notice board in
lobby, website, e-mail communications, verbal presentation at faculty meetings). Provide adequate
assistance/support for change.
Address unit-specific factors that influence well-being in the university workplace. Provide collective
strategies and individual opportunities to enhance a healthy academic workplace environment.
Acknowledge past history and efforts regarding curriculum development. Engage faculty in dialogue
regarding a rationale, benefits, significant differences and examples of real changes that occur from a
learning-centred approach to curriculum re-design
Making Teaching Count. Convey commitment of academic unit toward teaching excellence (e.g., hiring
priorities, reward system). Provide informational resources and open meetings/workshop support.
Provide faculty with interactive communication access to curriculum reform process (e.g., web-site, E-mail,
suggestion boxes in key locations, interactive curriculum committee representatives).
Engage faculty in identifying and acknowledging barriers (individual and collective) and developing potential
solutions for curricular reform. Provide adequate support and on-going workshop assistance for faculty
regarding learning-centred approaches to course design, assessment of student learning, and teaching
methods in higher education.
Integrate curriculum development and scholarship of teaching into tenure/promotion process.
Use multiple communications to update and to elicit faculty input. Provide visible curriculum notice-board
with flow chart events, progress reports, challenges/issues etc.
Consider curriculum development as an on-going multifaceted process. Revisit and utilise faculty input,
monitor progress, critically evaluate, refine.
RIJA100093.fm Page 55 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
6/19
56 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
stage(buy-in readiness and integration of responsive outcomes, assessment strategies and
learning modules developed); and, finally apractice stage(on-going systematic analysis, refine-
ment, further development and dissemination of curriculum reform process). Figure 2
Table 2. Implementing learning-centred curricula: Practical strategies for planning
Planning strategies
(Developing clearly defined curriculum-wide learning outcomes)
Develop/brainstorm desirable learning outcomescompare with other departments. Adapt learning
outcome templates to suit needs and circumstances, versus re-invent wheel or rigid compliance.
Develop responsive, higher order and accountable learning outcomes versus narrow/simplistic
measurement-driven outcomes or, in contrast, lofty outcomes without due consideration for assessment
and evaluation. Consider global (related to core program) and specific (related to program streams)
learning outcomes from the cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains. For example, nine ability-
based global outcomes in the faculty of pharmaceutical sciences included: critical thinking, scientific
inquiry, mathematical skills, independent learning skills, information access and evaluation skills, ethical
behaviour, communication skills, social awareness, interpersonal and teamwork skills, and apply andintegrate knowledge.
Overly rigid, narrow or prescriptive curriculum learning outcomes are often undesirable, and unlikely to be
faithfully implemented in practice. Curricular learning outcomes, therefore, should be developed in
response to the needs of faculty, students and society, and be sufficiently flexible so that they can be
realistically accountable and adapted to local situations and changing circumstances (Battersby, 1997;
Green & Kreuter, 1991; Kanpol, 1995).
Integrate learning outcomes with evaluation, programming and contextual factors.
Seek workshop support if required.
Table 3. Implementing learning-centred curricula: Practical strategies assessment
Assessment strategies
(Range of methods used to assess curriculum-wide learning outcomes)
Integrate learning outcomes with evaluation, programming and contextual factors.
Consider a variety of authentic assessment techniques (e.g., presentations, portfolios, projects, exams)
Develop criteria and standards to differentiate levels of achievement.
Develop formative and summative evaluations, informal and formal evaluations, teacher-centred and
learner-centred evaluations.
Develop an assessment and evaluation framework to monitor curriculum learning outcomes. For example,
in the faculty of pharmaceutical sciences all courses are required to implement curriculum learning
outcomes; course syllabi is required for submission to curriculum committee; formal feedback is elicited
from students, faculty and external peer-review at key stages of the curriculum; core learning modules are
placed strategically in the curriculum (i.e., interdisciplinary caps courses, capstone project, portfolio
module).
Provide time/workshop support for faculty regarding learning-centred approaches to assessment and
evaluation.
RIJA100093.fm Page 56 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
7/19
Learning-centred Curricula 57
illustrates the progressive, though cyclical and messy realities of curriculum reform, from the
Awareness Stagethrough to the Practice Stage.Figure2. Diagramshowingthe progressive,thoughcyclical andunpredictablerealities ofcurriculumreform
In addition to understanding the unique context in which an academic unit operates, there-
fore, it is also important for academic developers to recognise the units readiness and stage of
curriculum reform. Generally, learning context strategies were especially important during the
Awareness, Initiative and MobilisationStages, whereas emphases on planning, assessment and
programming strategies tended to be more relevant during the Action PlanStage. Rigorous
reflection and feedback strategies, in the form of program evaluation data, is most informative
Table 4. Implementing learning-centred curricula: Practical strategies for programming
Programming strategies
(Program streams, teaching methods/learning experiences driven by curriculum-wide learning outcomes)
Integrate learning outcomes and evaluation strategies to overall program(s) of study.
Develop program(s) of study including: sequencing, time phases, core courses, pre-req./electives.
Apply learning outcomes and evaluation strategies to program(s) of study.
Consider a variety of teaching/delivery strategies (teacher-centred, learner-centred, combined).
Consider innovative learning modules and broad-based pedagogies (e.g., cohort learning experiences,
interdisciplinary study, portfolio development, problem-based and case-based learning, lecture /lab,
self-directed research, collaborative research, web-based learning, community-based and field experiences,peer-teaching modules, student conferences) that are applied in an integrated manner.
Develop individual course offerings and apply learning outcomes and evaluation strategies.
Provide time/workshop support for faculty regarding learning-centred approaches to course design,
assessment and instructional skills.
Curriculum development is an on-going processrevisit data, encourage input, monitor effectiveness,
refine, seek workshop support if required.
Figure 2. Diagram showing the progressive, though cyclical and unpredictable realities of curriculum reform
RIJA100093.fm Page 57 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
8/19
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
9/19
Learning-centred Curricula 59
Typically, university faculties and academic units embrace several sub-disciplines, each
with their own distinct sub-culture and perspective of the main discipline. Thus, during the
Mobilisation Stage, the entire faculty were engaged collectively, and through disciplinary
streams, in open-dialogue and needs analysis pertaining to the curriculum reform process.
This was particularly effective through Town hall meetings (that is, discussion fora about
curriculum issues for faculty, administrators, students and professionals in the field), notice-
board information about on-going issues and progress with the curriculum reform process,
individual and focus group interviews with faculty members, and e-mail surveys and consulta-
tion with student and professional groups.
To ensure a well-designed and cohesive program among various sub-disciplines requires
specific attention to vertical and horizontal curriculum integration. During the Action Plan
Stage, therefore, faculty members were organised by specific groupings and challenged todevelop flexible and responsive learning modules within the curriculum. For example,
following development of the global (and specific) learning outcomes document within the
UBC Pharmaceutical Sciences program, disciplinary-based working groups were estab-
lished to develop course streams over the 4 years of the program and integrate (vertical
integration) outcomes with learning experiences and assessment strategies within the sub-
disciplinary field (Purkerson Hammer & Paulsen, 2001). Horizontal integration of knowl-
edge and skills across the disciplines was co-ordinated by the curriculum committee and
chair by designing case-based learning modules (entitled Cases in Pharmaceutical Sciences,
CAPS) which students take continuously throughout the four-year program. The goal of
CAPS modules is to give the students opportunities to apply and integrate knowledge, skills
and attitudes being learned in the individual disciplinary streams to the solving of multidisci-
plinary cases and problems. The complexity of the cases and problems in CAPS increases as
the students progress through the program. Figure 3 is a model that conceptualises how
vertical and horizontal integration was conceived for student learning throughout the four-
year Pharmaceutical Sciences program. This model indicates the importance given to the
core CAPS courses in years 14. These CAPS courses not only draw upon the expertise and
issues of the sub-disciplines but they also build upon one another in each progressive year
throughout the program. In addition, all nine ability-based outcomes are assessed through-
out all four years of the curriculum. Table 5 provides examples of how ability-based learning
outcomes are connected to authentic methods of assessment and diverse learning modules
within the learning-centred curriculum.Figure3. Amodel conceptualizingverticaland horizontalintegrationthroughout thefour-yearPharmaceutical SciencesProgram
The Practice stageof curriculum reform is on-going and will result in a formal and detailed
review of the curriculum within a 3-year period. These data will be comprised of process,impact and follow-up evaluations. Such evaluations provide a broad and long perspective
through which to investigate contextually-bound program processes and outcomes (Fullan,
2001; Green & Kreuter, 1999; Hubball & Clarke, 2004; Kreber & Brook, 2001; Mills, 2000;
Stark et al., 1996; Priest, 2001). Process evaluations focus on periodic assessments of issues of
importance that occur throughout the duration of a program (for example, to what extent are
program goals reflected in individual course learning experiences?). Impact evaluations focus
on issues of importance that occur as a result of a program (for example, how did students
apply their learning? What were the main strengths and weaknesses of the program?). Follow-
up evaluations focus on issues of importance that occur as a result of the longer term (months,
year) impact of a program (for example, how did the program contribute to your current
RIJA100093.fm Page 59 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
10/19
60 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
development as a professional pharmacist?). Prior to the 3-year review, disciplinary stream
leaders are charged with collecting informal evaluation data (for example, self-reflections,
feedback from colleagues, student evaluations of individual courses) and providing on-going
feedback to the curriculum chair. In this way, progress with the whole program is co-
ordinated and continually monitored.
Early Reflections on the Process of Learning-centred Curriculum Reform
Despite a thorough, well-coordinated and systematic approach to curriculum reform in the
UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, change was typically incremental and, at various
times throughout each stage created a great deal of anxiety for many faculty members as theyintermittently engaged with this challenging process, in addition to an otherwise demanding
academic workload. As would be expected by experienced educational developers, initial
resistance was expressed by some individual faculty members who perceived student learning
in the curriculum to be driven exclusively by exposure to required content (usually quantity),
versus adopt general ability-based outcomes (divorced of content) to drive the curriculum.
Through various faculty meetings, discussions and workshop experiences, it became more
clear to them that content and ability-based outcomes in a learning-centred curricula are
interdependent. Content is clearly that which differentiates one course from another,
however, in a learning-centred curriculum, content is integrated with ability-based outcomes
as the driving force for teaching and learning.
Figure 3. A model conceptualizing vertical and horizontal integration throughout the four-year
Pharmaceutical Sciences Program
RIJA100093.fm Page 60 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
11/19
Learning-centred Curricula 61
The lack of release time for the committee chair contributed to periods of lost ground and
momentum during the process which had a significant effect on the time-lines for completion
of various stages of curriculum reform. The chairs leadership qualities, commitment, and
Table 5. Ability-based outcomes, assessment strategies and learning modules in the
four-year pharmacy curriculum
Outcome Assessment tools LEARNING MODULES
Crxitical thinking skills - In class, take home, exam cases
- Written reports
- Problem sets
- Case presentations
- Debates
- Self, peer, assessment
- Program Portfolio
TO ADDRESS OVERALL
ABILITY-BASED
OUTCOMES
Information access and evaluation - Library assignments
- Critical review of literature- Debate of literature
- Mini lecture
Communication skills - Written exams
- Written reports
- Oral presentations
- Videotape counseling
- Practical lab exams
- Essays
- Self, peer evaluations
- Program portfolio
Problem-based Learning
Web-based Learning
Lectures
Laboratories
Scientific inquiry skills - Analysis of evidence and data
- Laboratory results and reports- Written evaluations of literature
Practica
Learning PortfoliosCAPS (case-based learning)
Self-directed learning skills - Program Portfolio
- Quizzes, exams, reports,
assignments
- Self, peer evaluation
- Case analysis
Mathematical skills - Quizzes
- Problem sets
- Lab reports
- Assignments
- Exams
Interpersonal and teamwork skills - Self and peer assessments- Program portfolio
Ethical behaviour & social
awareness
- Case studies
- Portfolio
- Self and peer assessments
Apply and integrate knowledge - Written cases
- Written problems to solve
RIJA100093.fm Page 61 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
12/19
62 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
ability to mobilise the faculty learning community, as well as the external program threat of
non-accreditation (and by extension to job security), were critical factors for developing and
implementing a learning-centred curriculum during this overly long (five-year) time frame. At
the Practice Stageof curriculum reform, however, the UBC Pharmaceutical Sciences program
was granted accreditation by the Canadian Council on Accreditation of Pharmacy Programs
(CCAPP), as well as being successfully approved by the university senate curriculum commit-
tee. Although it is recognised that on-going refinements and adjustments to the curriculum are
inevitable, preliminary survey feedback data and focus group interviews suggest that the new
curriculum has been met very favourably by students and faculty members thus far. Table 6
identifies the critical lessons learned from the UBC Pharmaceutical Sciences experience.
Conclusion
Curriculum reform is a complex, multifaceted, and iterative process, in which ideas,
expressed as policy, are transformed into behaviour, expressed as a social action (Ottoson &
Green, 1987; Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). Thus, curriculum reform is shaped by
many factors (social, political, economic, organisational, cultural and individual) and involves
people at various institutional levels (administrators, curriculum development committee
personnel, instructors and learners). Clearly, learning context factors play a central role in
curricular reform (Angelo, 2000). In the Pharmaceutical Sciences experience, the extent to
which a learning community (that is, the academic unit) was empowered, as well as the
commitment of adequate resources and the power to influence people required during this
process, had a significant effect on the outcome. Timing is also crucial, not only in terms of
the urgency, or the stimulus and support for curriculum reform, but also in terms of an analy-
sis of long-term, intermediate and short-term goals and clarifying when, where, and who is
responsible for achieving these goals.
Table 6. Implementing learning-centred curricula: Lessons learned in the UBC Faculty of
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Strong leadership qualities required
Release time and support required for committee chair
Inclusive committee design required
Outside expertise and professional development required
Open-mind and flexibility toward a broad range of pedagogies and integration of program specialisations
and fields required (i.e., maintain facultys comfort-level with disciplinary knowledge, as well as focus on
pedagogical implications of ability-based outcomes)
Integrated approach to curriculum redesign AND implementation process required
Continuous reporting of progress and open dialogue required with faculty and students (e.g., town hall
meetings, faculty retreats, faculty meetings, notice board/website displays)
Individual faculty required to implement ability-based outcomes within individual courses
Conduct action research, on-going monitoring, and dissemination
Endurance!
RIJA100093.fm Page 62 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
13/19
Learning-centred Curricula 63
Implementing learning-centred curricula cannot be considered simply as a series of non-
problematic and discrete steps. It is not surprising, therefore, that inherent complexities in
curriculum re-design can present significant pedagogical, as well as implementation chal-
lenges, for academic units in higher education. By implication, these challenges also extend to
individual faculty who need to re-examine their course design, assessment and learning strate-
gies to meet the objectives of the learning-centred curriculum (Adamcik et al., 1996; Beaudry
& Schaub, 1998; Diamond, 1998; Hubball & Levy, 2004; Lawler & King, 2000; Purkerson
Hammer & Paulsen, 2001). This article provides a flexible framework that takes into account
context and integrates comprehensive strategies to assist academic units with re-designing and
implementing learning-centred curricula. Ultimately, the success of re-designing and imple-
menting a learning-centred curriculum, is contingent on the attention that is paid to integrat-
ing appropriate stage-specific learning context, planning, assessment and programmingstrategies.
Note
This paper uses the term curriculum as referring to, the accredited program offered by an academic unit in
higher education.
Notes on Contributors
Harry Hubball PhD has provided curriculum development consultancy for multidisciplinary
units at The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. His research interests
include teacher education, curriculum development, and pedagogy in university settings.
He co-ordinates the UBC Faculty Certificate Program on Teaching and Learning in Higher
Education.
Helen Burt PhD chaired the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences Curriculum Review
Committee from 19972001 to design and develop an outcomes-based curriculum. Her
research interests include the development of novel polymer-based drug delivery systems.
References
Adamcik, B., Hurley, S., & Erramouspe, J. (1996). Assessment of pharmacy students critical thinking and
problem-solving abilities.American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 60,256265.
Angelo, T. A. (2000). Transforming departments into productive learning communities. In A. F. Lucas &Associates (Eds.),Leading academic change: Essential roles for department chairs(pp. 7489). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Baird, L. L. (1996). Documenting student outcomes in graduate and professional programs. In A. E. Bilder
& C. F. Conrad (Eds.),Challenges in assessing outcomes in graduate and professional education, New Direc-
tions For Institutional Research, 92,7787.
Baker, P. (1999). Creating learning communities: The unfinished agenda. In B. A. Pescosolido & R. Aminzade
(Eds.),The social worlds of higher education(pp. 95109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Barab, S. A. & Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen & S.M.
Land (Eds.). Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, (pp. 2556). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Associates.
Baron, M. A. (1996). Dispelling the myths surrounding outcome-based education.Phi Delta Kappan, 77,
574576.
RIJA100093.fm Page 63 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
14/19
64 H. Hubball and Helen Burt
Barr, R. B. & Tag, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education.
Change, 27(6), 1325.
Battersby, M. (1997). Outcomes-based education: A college faculty perspective.Learning Quarterly,February,
1,611.
Beaudry, M. L. & Schaub, T. (1998). The learning-centred syllabus.The Teaching Professor, 12(2), 5.
Brandt, B. F., Clements, M., & Piascik, P. (1998). Problem-solving activities for first-year pharmacy
students.American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 62,450457.
Brown, G., Bull, J., & Pendlebury, M. (1997). Assessing student learning in higher education.London: Rout-
ledge.
Clanchy, J. & Ballard, B. (1995). Generic skills in the context of higher education.Higher Education Research
and Development, 14,155166.
Clarke, A. & Hubball, H. T. (2001). Physical Education Methods Course as an Immersion Experience in an
Elementary Setting.Avante, 7(2), 1127.
Cox, M. (2000). Faculty learning communities. Change agents for transforming institutions into learningorganisations. In D. Lieberman & C. Wehlburg (Eds.),To Improve the Academy, 19(pp. 6993). Boston,
MA: Anker.
Daniel, J. (1993). The challenge of mass education.Studies in Higher Education, 18,197203.
Diamond, R. M. (1998). Developing and assessing courses and curricula.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Drummond, I., Nixon, I., & Wiltshire, J. (1998). Personal transferable skills in higher education: The prob-
lems of implementing good practice.Quality Assurance in Education, 6,4458.
Erickson, L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Sage
Publications,.
Ewell, P. T. (1997). Organizing for learning: A new imperative.AAHE Bulletin,December 1997.
Fullan, M. G. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. (3rd Edn). New York: Teachers College,
Columbia University.
Ganderton, P. S. (1996). Concepts of globalisation and their impact upon curriculum policy making:
Rhetoric and reality a study of Australasian reform.International Journal of Educational Development, 16,
393405.
Gibbons, M. (2000). Universities of the new production of knowledge: Some policy implications for govern-
ment. In A. Kraak (Ed.).Changing modes: New knowledge production and its implications for higher education
in South Africa.Pretoria: HSRC.
Gold, P. (1997). Faculty collaboration for a new curriculum.Liberal Education, 83,4649.
Green, A. (1999). Education and globalisation in Europe and E.Asia: Convergent and divergent trends.
Journal of Educational Policy, 14,5571.
Green, M. F. (1995). Transforming British higher education: A view from across the Atlantic.Higher Educa-
tion, 29,225239.
Green, L. W. & Kreuter, M. (1999). Health promotion planning: An educational and ecological approach.Palo
Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishing.
Hubball, H. T. & Poole, G. (in press). A learning-centred course on university teaching.International Journal
for Academic Development.
Hubball, H. T. & Clarke, A. (2004). Assessing Faculty Learning Communities. In M. D. Cox and L. Richlin(Eds.)Building Faculty Learning Communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning (the Journal),
97,87100.
Hubball, H. T. & Levy, A (2004). Graduate Course Design in Health Care and Epidemiology A Learning-
Centred Approach.Journal for Faculty Development, 20(1).
Jansen, J. & Christie, P. (Eds.) (1999). Changing curriculum: Studies on outcomes-based education in South
Africa.Cape Town: Juta.
Kanpol, B. (1995). Outcomes-based education and democratic commitment hopes and possibilities.Educa-
tional Policy, 9,359374.
Kemp I. J. & Seagraves L. (1995). Transferable Skills - can higher education deliver?Studies in Higher Educa-
tion, 20,315328.
Knight, P. T. & Trowler, P. R. (2000). Department level cultures and the improvement of learning and
teaching.Studies in Higher Education, 25,69-83.
AQ2
AQ3
RIJA100093.fm Page 64 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
15/19
Learning-centred Curricula 65
Kreber, C. & Brook, P. (2001). Impact evaluation of educational development programs. International
Journal for Academic Development, 6,96108.
Kupperschmidt, B. R. & Burns, P. (1997). Curriculum revision isnt just change: Its transition! Journal of
Professional Nursing, 13,9098.
Lawler, P. A. & King, K. P. (2000). Planning for effective faculty development: Using adult learning strategies.
Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
Lockhart, M. & Borland, K.W. (2001). Critical thinking goals, outcomes, and pedagogy in senior capstone
courses.The Journal of Faculty Development, 18,1925.
Middendorf, J. K. (1999). Finding key faculty to influence change.To Improve the Academy, 18,8393.
Mills, G. E. (2000).Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice
Hall.
Mok, K. H. (1999). Education and the market place in Hong Kong and mainland China. Higher Education,
37,133158.
Murphy, S. E. (1997). Eight components of program implementation.Performance Improvement, 36,68.Nolinske, T. (1999). Creating an inclusive learning environment.Teaching Excellence, 11(4), 13.
Ottoson, J. M. & Green, L. W. (1987). Reconciling concept and context: Theory of implementation.
Advances in Health Education and Promotion, 2,353382.
Perrier, D. G., Winslade, N., Pugsley, J., Lavack, L., & Strand, L. M. (1995). Designing a pharmaceutical
care curriculum.American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 59,113125.
Pietersen, W. G. (2002). Re-inventing strategy: Using strategic learning to create and sustain breakthrough
performance.London: John Wiley and Sons.
Poindexter, S. (2003). Holistic learning.Change, January/February,2530.
Priest, S. (2001). A program evaluation primer.Journal of Experiential Education, 24,3440.
Purkerson Hammer, D., & Paulsen, S. M. (2001). Strategies and processes to design an integrated, longitudi-
nal professional skills development course sequence.American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 65,
7785.
Raman-Wilms, L. (2001). Innovative enabling strategies in self-directed, problem-based therapeutics:
Enhancing student preparedness for pharmaceutical care practice.American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 65,5664.
Schneider, C. G. & Shoenberg, R. (1999). Habits hard to break: How persistent features of campus life frus-
trate curricular reform.Change,March/April,3035.
Shulman, L. (1999). Taking Learning Seriously.Change,1117.
Shavelson, R. & Huang, L. (2003). Responding responsibly to the frenzy to assess learning in higher educa-
tion.Change,January/February,1118.
Stark, J. S., et al. (1996). Program-level curriculum planning: An exploration of faculty perspectives on two
different campuses.Research in Higher Education, 38,99130.
Stinson, J. E. & Milter, R.G. (1996). Problem-based learning in business education: Curriculum design and
implementation issues. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to
higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68,3342.
Trowler, P. R. (1996). Angels in marble? Accrediting prior experiential learning in higher education. Studies
in Higher Education, 21,1730.VP Academic and Provost (2000). UBC Academic Plan: Trek 2000.Strategic visioning document developed
by the Academic Plan Advisory Committee, The University of British Columbia.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice.Boston, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Wiles, J. & Bondi, J. (2002). Curriculum development: A guide to practice, (6th Edn). Upper Saddle River, OH:
Merrill Prentice Hall.
AQ4
AQ1
RIJA100093.fm Page 65 Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:42 PM
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
16/19
Author Query SheetJournal: iJAD MSID:
Title: An Integrated Approach to Developing and Implementing Learning-centredCurricula
Authors: Harry Hubball and Helen Burt
QA1: Please provide all authors for the Stark, J. S., et al. (1996) reference.QA2: Please provide page numbers for the Ewell, P. T. (1997) reference.
QA3: Please provide page numbers for the Hubball, H. T., & Levy, A (2004)reference.
QA4: Please provide issue/month details for Shulman, L. (1999).
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
17/19
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
18/19
AN AGREEMENT FOR THE TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT
IN RELATION TO THE CONTRIBUTION OF YOUR ARTICLE (THE ARTICLE) ENTITLED:
BY:
WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED IN R-IJA
In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in our Journal,we ask authors to assign the rights of copyright in the articles they contribute. This enables Taylor &Francis Ltd ('us' or 'we') to ensure protection against infringement. In consideration of the publicationof your Article, you agree to the following:
1. You assign to us with full title guarantee all rights of copyright and related rights in yourArticle. So that there is no doubt, this assignment includes the assignment of the right topublish the Article in all forms, including electronic and digital forms, for the full legal term ofthe copyright and any extension or renewals. Electronic form shall include, but not be limitedto, microfiche, CD-ROM and in a form accessible via on-line electronic networks. You shallretain the right to use the substance of the above work in future works, including lectures,press releases and reviews, provided that you acknowledge its prior publication in the journal.
2. We shall prepare and publish your Article in the Journal. We reserve the right to make sucheditorial changes as may be necessary to make the Article suitable for publication, or as wereasonably consider necessary to avoid infringing third party rights or law; and we reserve theright not to proceed with publication for whatever reason.
3. You hereby assert your moral rights to be identified as the author of the Article according tothe UK Copyright Designs & Patents Act 1988.
4. You warrant that you have at your expense secured the necessary written permission fromthe appropriate copyright owner or authorities for the reproduction in the Article and theJournal of any text, illustration, or other material. You warrant that, apart from any such thirdparty copyright material included in the Article, the Article is your original work, and does notinfringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity and cannot be construedas plagiarising any other published work. You further warrant that the Article has not beenpreviously assigned or licensed by you to any third party and you will undertake that it will notbe published elsewhere without our written consent.
5. In addition you warrant that the Article contains no statement that is abusive, defamatory,libelous, obscene, fraudulent, nor in any way infringes the rights of others, nor is in any otherway unlawful or in violation of applicable laws.
6. You warrant that wherever possible and appropriate, any patient, client or participant in anyresearch or clinical experiment or study who is mentioned in the Article has given consent tothe inclusion of material pertaining to themselves, and that they acknowledge that they cannotbe identified via the Article and that you will not identify them in any way.
7. You warrant that you shall include in the text of the Article appropriate warnings concerningany particular hazards that may be involved in carrying out experiments or proceduresdescribed in the Article or involved in instructions, materials, or formulae in the Article, andshall mention explicitly relevant safety precautions, and give, if an accepted code of practiceis relevant, a reference to the relevant standard or code.
8. You shall keep us and our affiliates indemnified in full against all loss, damages, injury, costsand expenses (including legal and other professional fees and expenses) awarded against or
incurred or paid by us as a result of your breach of the warranties given in this agreement.
-
8/12/2019 Integrated App. Dev.learning Cen Curricula
19/19