Best Practice in Co-created Curriculum

1. Work in progress May 2015
Best Practice in Co-created Curriculum

2. Co-created curriculum
2PACE
Two broad bodies of knowledge:
1. Co-creation of curriculum in the partner context (literature by indigenous NGOs and
academics)
2. Co-creation of curriculum in the university context (literature by NGOs and academics
engaging with partners in-country – fields of CBSL / ISL)
While we are primarily concerned with (2.) our work needs to intersect with and contribute
to (1.)
Approach

3. Co-created curriculum
3PACE
Broadly speaking, three stages can be identified:
1. Identify related problems and opportunities in the community
i.e. read one’s social reality.
2. Determine the HR capabilities required to address these problems.
NB scientific and technological knowledge requirements
3. Design curriculum (various constituencies – local population, government, NGOs
and universities)
(Arbab, Correa and da Valcarel, 1988; FUNDAEC, (nd); Leach and Little, 1999;
Helu-Thaman, 2014; Nabobo-Baba, 2012)
Co-creation in the partner context

4. Co-created curriculum
4PACE
Stage (3.) – Curriculum design
As stage 3 is dependent on (1.) and (2.) i.e. we need to know:
- the scope and nature of the problems in our partner communities;
- the opportunities that present;
- the HR capabilities required to address the problems.
(Crabtree, 2013; Hatcher and Bringle, 2010; Kahn, 2011)
→ This information will determine the foci of our workshop. (Visits to partners will be key here.)
NB The involvement of Unit Convenors to provide expertise (in areas outside those of the research
team) will be important.
Co-creation in the university context

5. Co-created curriculum
5PACE
Drawing on information from stages 1. and 2. the following questions arise:
1. What are our students’ resources and how can they be developed in line with
partner needs (and MQ grad caps)?
In collaboration with partners:
2. What are the corresponding concepts?
3. What content should be covered and what should students research prior to visit?
4. What activities can be developed through which students can acquire and
develop their capabilities?
5. What structured reflective components can be developed?
(Bringle and Hatcher, 2011; Crabtree, 2008; Smith-Paríolá and Gòkè-Paríolá, 2006)
Curriculum design

6. Co-created curriculum
6PACE
Cyclical approach: The above questions should follow a sequence of research,
action and learning through a series of consecutive approximations.
(Arbab and Correa, 1998; Wadsworth, 2010)
Workshop with partners:
1. Define – framing presentation to more clearly define the workshop objectives
2. Explore – open space sessions, nuts and bolts, success factors
3. Design – develop blueprints, share commitments , synthesise commonalities
in models , seek feedback from participants
(USAID, SIDA, Reboot & Civicus, 2014)
Principles in practice

7. Co-created curriculum
7PACE
Reflection
- Where possible reflect with host communities
- Structure to enable a new interpretation of events and deeper understanding of
host communities
Reflexivity -engage in introspection to offset biases
Student attitudes to be developed - open mindedness, willingness to learn from
host community; concept of self as active agent of own learning, etc.
(Chambers, 2013; Eyler, & Giles, 1999; Hammersley, 2014)
Considerations

8. Co-created curriculum
8PACE
Reciprocity – the organising principle
Challenges:
- Different objectives: student learning / community goals
- Power differential
- Partner staff may not accurately represent interest of their community
(Crabtree, 2008; Grusky 2000).
Next steps…
Further considerations

9. Co-created Curriculum
9PACE
Arbab, F., Correa, G. and da Valcarel, F. (1988). FUNDAEC: its principles and its activities. Cali, Colombia, Celater.
Retrieved May 20, 2015 from http://www.fundaec.org/en/institution/celater_doc.htm
Bringle, R., Hatcher, J. and Jones S. (Eds.) (2011). International Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and
Research. Sterling, Stylus.
Chambers, R. (2013). ‘Participation for development: A good time to be alive’ Development Bulletin. 75, April, 2-3.
Crabtree, R. (2008). ‘Theoretical Foundations for International Service Learning’ Michigan Journal of
Community Service Learning, Fall, 18-36.
Crabtree, R. (2013). ‘The intended and unintended consequences of international service-learning’ in The Journal of
Higher Education, Outreach and Engagement, 17:2, 43-66.
Eyler, J. and Giles, D. (1999). Where is the learning in service learning? San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
FUNDAEC, (nd). Retrieved May 17, 2015 from http://www.fundaec.org/en/
Grusky, S. (2000). ‘International Service learning’ American Behavioural Scientist.43, 858-867.
Hammersley, L. (2013). ‘Volunteer Tourism: Building effective relationships of understanding’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
22: 6, 855-873.
Hatcher, J. and Bringle, R. (2010). ‘Reflection: Bridging the gap between service and learning.’ Retrieved May 20, 2015 from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/87567559709596221
References

10. Co-created Curriculum
10PACE
Helu-Thaman, K. (2014). ‘Towards cultural democracy in university teaching and research with special reference to the Pacific
Island region’ in C. Mason and F. Rawlings-Sanaei, (Eds.) Academic Migration, Discipline Knowledge and Pedagogical
Practice: Voices from the Asia-Pacific. Singapore, Springer.
Kahn, H. (2011). Overcoming the Challenges of International Service learning’ in R. Bringle, J. Hatcher and
S. Jones (Eds.) International Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Research. Sterling, Stylus. 113-124.
Leach, F. and Little, A. (1999). Education, Cultures, and Economic: Dilemmas for Development. New York, Falmer.
Nabobo-Baba, U. (2012). ‘Transformations from within: Rethinking Pacific Education Initiative. The
development of a movement for social justice and equity’, The International Education Journal: of Comparative Perspectives,
2012, 11(2), 82–97.
Smith-Paríolá, J. and Gòkè-Paríolá, A. (2006). ‘Expanding the parameters of service-learning: a case study’,
Journal of Studies in International Education. 10:1 71-86.
USAID, SIDA, Reboot and CIVICUS. 2014. ‘Co-creating the Civil Society Innovation Initiative’. Retrieved May 20, 2015 from
http://reboot.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/USAID_CivSocInno_ProcessNote_%C6%92_web.pdf
Wadsworth, Y. (2010). Building in Research and Evaluation. Crows Nest, Allen & Unwin.
References

11. Thank you
END