Overcoming Silos: A Sustainable and Innovative Approach to Curriculum Development

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of being adaptable and flexible in our teaching practices in higher education. Traditionally, a siloed approach to curriculum development has dominated in higher education institutions. These silos are known to create inefficiencies and, in the context of developing teaching resources, often result in the duplication of curricula, resulting in wasted effort and time, and inconsistent teaching practices. In this short communication, we put forward a sustainable and innovative approach to cross-disciplinary curriculum development, known as the Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health initiative. This ongoing initiative was launched in 2018 and brought together teaching academics and students to co-design a centralized online repository of high-quality, evidence-based online educational modules that support student learning across disciplines. A mixed-methods evaluation of this initiative found that this is a well-utilized repository of engaging modules (n = 46) that have enhanced learning outcomes for both undergraduate and postgraduate health professional students. The Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health initiative has wide-ranging applicability, beyond disciplines, and is a sustainable, efficient, and strategic approach to enhance pedagogy and the student experience.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic brought to the forefront the need to be agile and flexible in our approach to teaching in higher education [1]. While it is unclear how COVID-19 will reshape our society, this ongoing pandemic is accelerating innovation in higher education, particularly where teaching is online, blended or hybrid. Traditionally, a siloed approach to curriculum development has dominated in higher education institutions [2,3]. Organizational silos in business terms are defined as the separation of different types of employees, often grouped by the discipline/department in which they work. These silos are a natural occurrence at universities; however, they can create inefficiencies and, in the context of developing teaching resources, often result in the duplication of curricula, resulting in wasted effort and time [4]. Such practices result in inconsistent teaching practices, especially for students studying cross-disciplinary degrees or those on a pathway from undergraduate generalist to postgraduate professional degrees [5]. What are desperately needed are efficient and effective approaches to developing inter-disciplinary curricula [6].

Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health Initiative

Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health (Connected Curriculum) brought together teaching academics and students across the Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences (FMHHS), at a major tier-two Australian university, to co-design a centralized online repository of high-quality, evidence-based educational modules that support student learning across disciplines. These specifically curated modules align with the faculty’s graduate capability framework, which includes four graduate attributes: Scientist and Scholar, Health Practitioner, Engaged Global Citizen, Professional. Figure 1 outlines the Connected Curriculum logo and mission of the initiative.

Launched in 2018 and hosted on the university’s learning management system (LMS), Connected Curriculum houses 46 modules, of which 24 have been developed in house, utilizing existing expertise, and 22 procured from third parties for specialist content not available within the faculty. The Connected Curriculum modules are available to all students for the duration of their studies.

To ensure inclusivity and broad applicability, a governance committee (n = 10) was established to oversee the initiative and included staff and student representatives from across all courses in the faculty. Committee staff members were selectively invited based on their championing of learning and teaching and student-centered approach. These staff were junior and mid-level academics, with the lead of the initiative also an experienced learning designer. Figure 2 outlines the process used to develop a Connected Curriculum module.

Committee members, in consultation with their departmental colleagues (n = 10), would pitch modules. In these pitches, the academic/s would explain the current gap in the curricula, present their module idea, and outline proposed learning outcomes and the relevance of the module across disciplines, units and/or courses in the faculty. If determined by the committee that the gap in curricula needed addressing, a scoping document (Supplementary File S1) would be completed by the academic lead. This scoping document would be assessed by the Connected Curriculum Lead and Associate Dean of Learning and Teaching to ensure feasibility and strategic use of resources. If signed off, the module would then be storyboarded by the academic lead, who would also recruit subject matter experts to contribute. The Connected Curriculum Lead would aid with content curation and provide feedback on storyboarding, to ensure the module included opportunities for student interaction and the application of knowledge. Once the storyboard was finalized, the Connected Curriculum Lead would build the module, send it back to the academic lead for testing and review, and would then deploy the module on the Connected Curriculum platform. The academic lead would then be responsible for providing an annual review of the module to ensure the content reflects the latest evidence.

The design of the Connected Curriculum modules was underpinned by cognitive load theory [7] and an active learning instructional approach [8]. Figure 3 explains how the modules were designed to reflect best practice. Each module includes formative knowledge checks, providing a low-risk environment for students to assess their level of understanding, as well as interactive activities (e.g., drag and drop, sorting activities, flip cards) to ensure the learning experience is active rather than passive. Setting clear expectations for students is essential and, thus, each module is assigned a difficulty level (beginner, intermediate, advanced), an estimated completion time, and an attribution to one or more graduate attributes.

The Connected Curriculum initiative has been widely promoted to faculty staff, allowing unit convenors to include applicable modules in their curricula, some of which are outside their area of expertise. Connected Curriculum modules are utilized by faculty academics in a variety of ways: in a flipped classroom setting [9], as preparatory activities for assessments or prior to tutorial or practical-based classes; as supplementary resources following on-campus or online synchronous learning sessions; and in some instances, as group activities to be completed during class time. These modules are also commonly delivered as stand-alone content, particularly on topics that are complex and relevant across multiple units and years within a course, thereby offering sustainability and consistency of teaching.

Students who are more engaged in learning are deemed more likely to be academically successful [10,11]. Student engagement in online learning can be defined in terms of behavioural engagement: when students actively participate in online learning activities; cognitive engagement: when students show motivation to learn and demonstrate self-regulated learning; and lastly, emotional engagement: when students express positive attitudes within and towards the online learning environment [12]. Research also supports that student engagement is related to satisfaction [13]. The aim of this study was to conduct a brief evaluation of student engagement and satisfaction of Connected Curriculum and its modules.

2. Materials and Methods

Student behavioural engagement with the Connected Curriculum platform and associated modules was evaluated via LMS analytics between 2018 and 2022. A sample (n = 283) of undergraduate (n = 170) and postgraduate (n = 113) students were invited to complete a questionnaire about the utility and design of the Connected Curriculum modules. This questionnaire included three five-point (strongly agree to strongly disagree) Likert scale questions for feedback on the student learning experience. These questions were designed as a brief evaluation of the students’ perspectives about the Connected Curriculum modules and were in addition to the standardized learning evaluation of unit surveys disbursed every teaching session. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Ethical approval was provided by Macquarie University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval: 520211029728943).

3. Results

Analysis of LMS reporting from July 2018 to April 2022 found that 1939 students and staff accessed and searched the Connected Curriculum repository of modules on 42,451 occasions.

Table 1. The Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health modules developed in house.

Modules	Unique Users (UU-Students and Staff) *	Total Views (TV) *	TV/UU	Embedded into Courses #
An Introduction to Reflective Practice	1772	11,139	6.29	BClinSci, BHumSci, MPH, MRes, DPT, MD
The Basics of Referencing	1252	4261	3.40	BClinSci, BHumSci, MPH, MRes, DPT, MD
Gene Expression and Regulation	619	3912	6.32	BClinSci, MD
Introduction to Pharmacodynamics	894	3495	3.91	BClinSci, MD
Communicating in a Consultation	497	3182	6.40	BClinSci, MD
Interpreting Clinical Outcomes	590	2703	4.58	DPT, MD
The Healthcare System and You	604	2671	4.42	DPT, MD, MPH
Informed Consent	592	2018	3.41	DPT, MD
From Surviving to Thriving	369	1528	4.14	DPT, MD, BClinSci
Anatomical & Medical Terminology	313	1502	4.80	BClinSci, MD
Regulation and Licensing of Health Professionals	435	1481	3.40	DPT, MD
The Problem of Pain	462	1461	3.16	DPT, MD
What is Public Health?	251	1276	5.08	BHumSci, MPH
Introduction to Immunology	229	1115	4.87	BClinSci, MD
What Type of Pain is that?	274	1039	3.79	DPT, MD
Cell Cycle	146	1009	6.91	BClinSci, MD
Introduction to Microbiology	267	834	3.12	BClinSci, MD
Digital Professionalism	200	654	3.27	BClinSci, BHumSci, MPH, MRes, DPT, MD
The Psychology of Exercise and Motivation	135	479	3.55	BClinSci, BHumSci
Histology of Bone & Cartilage	140	469	3.35	BClinSci, MD
Introduction to the Nervous System	128	467	3.65	BClinSci, MD
Pain Management Resources	107	404	3.78	DPT, MD
The Neuroscience of Taste and Smell	112	350	3.13	DPT, MD
Histology of Muscle Tissue	85	269	3.16	DPT, MD

* These statistics were taken from LMS analytic reporting on 22/04/2022. # Abbreviations: Bachelor of Clinical Science (BClinSci), Bachelor of Human Sciences (BHumSci), Master of Public Health (MPH), Master of Research (MRes), Doctor of Physiotherapy (DPT), Doctor of Medicine (MD).

outlines student and staff engagement with the twenty-four modules developed in house. Notice that these modules are cross-disciplinary and embedded in multiple courses, with the total views suggesting that students revisited modules on many occasions.

A total of 147 students provided responses to the five-point Likert scale questions on the utility and design of Connected Curriculum, a 52% response rate (

Table 2. Undergraduate and postgraduate student feedback about CC modules.

Questionnaire Items	Postgraduate MPH # Students (n = 25)	Undergraduate BClinSci # Students (n = 122)
	% Agree or Strongly Agree (n)
Connected Curriculum modules have enhanced my learning experience	96.00% (24)	89.34% (109)
Connected Curriculum modules were engaging	96.00% (24)	81.15% (99)
Connected Curriculum modules include valuable resources that helped me prepare for assessments	92.00% (23)	88.52% (108)

# Master of Public Health (MPH), Bachelor of Clinical Science (BClinSci).

). Most students reported that Connected Curriculum modules enhanced their learning experience, the modules were engaging, and the modules included valuable resources that helped with preparation for assessments (Table 2).

4. Discussion

Connected Curriculum for Professionals in Health is a well-utilized platform, hosting high-quality, interactive, and engaging online modules that support student learning. This centralized online repository of educational materials has reduced unnecessary duplication of content across courses in the faculty and offers sustainability of teaching. This approach to curriculum development has been adapted to other disciplines in our university and could provide benefits across higher education institutions globally.

Connected Curriculum was launched pre-pandemic; however, the platform and governance processes have ensured that students have had seamless access to online modules that have enhanced their learning experience during a time of upheaval. The Connected Curriculum initiative has broken down institutional silos, by increasing communication between our departments. Previously, academics would have developed teaching materials within their discipline to meet course and unit learning outcomes. Connected Curriculum has enabled cross-disciplinary high-quality educational modules to be developed, by sharing expertise across the faculty and ensuring modules are designed so that they can be embedded within multiple units of study. This has fostered collegiality and improved the consistency of teaching, which has benefited students because there is a shared understanding of key concepts across undergraduate and postgraduate courses. For example, the most popular module on Connected Curriculum is “An Introduction to Reflective Practice”, a 30-minute module that explores reflection, why it is important, and how to write a reflective piece of assessment. Together, the Connected Curriculum Governance Committee (CCGC) came to a consensus on a single reflection model to be used in all teaching across all courses. Each time students are required to complete a formative or summative assessment task that includes reflection, they are directed back to this one foundational module. This approach to inter-disciplinary curriculum development has required an initial investment in time and resourcing but has had significant benefits long term. For example, over the past 4 years, more than 1700 students across our health science courses have revisited the reflection module on at least six occasions.

Connected Curriculum is an ongoing initiative and is financially supported internally by the university, through policy and workload allocation, with academics receiving workload time to develop and annually review Connected Curriculum modules. The CCGC conducted a formal reflection on the aspects of Connected Curriculum that have been significant in its success and identified three core themes:

(1)

Strong Champions—recruiting and retaining passionate and engaged teachers to be on the CCGC;

(2)

Institutional Support—supporting from the top with workload allocation for academics that engage, whether through subject matter expertise or being on the CCGC;

(3)

Quality and Expectations—developing high-quality modules resulted in upskilling teaching staff on best practice for online learning and helped to set new standards.

Over the past year, Connected Curriculum has been showcased at other universities within Australia (n = 8) and internationally (n = 3) and been recognized for its wide-ranging applicability beyond disciplines and its strategic approach to enhance pedagogy and the student experience, ensuring higher education institutions remain competitive in these uncertain times.

The primary limitation of this study is that it is a small-scale evaluation, with a representative sample of students and, thus, further research is warranted to validate the findings. Further qualitative evaluation of student and staff experiences with Connected Curriculum, as well as an economic analysis, would be helpful for ascertaining the value of this approach for higher education institutions.