I was once on a curriculum mapping task group. I actually enjoy course mapping & alignment, and curriculum mapping seemed like a worthwhile endeavor. We struggled as a team. Years later, I now realize that I should have approached that task differently. The Open Ed 2021 session entitled “Utilizing Curriculum Mapping to Assess Campus OER Adoption” caught my attention tonight. John McGee, Jennifer Pate, and Rachell Berry from The University of North Alabama were the presenters. Their Provost charged them with creating a task force on OER implementation. They created a grant program for faculty to implement OER. The Collier Library librarians are part of the process. Pate mentioned that Curriculum Mapping has been used by libraries for a long time. I had never considered this, and it makes so much sense! Libraries need to be aware of curricula to support students from numerous courses and programs… and curriculum mapping helps them identify materials learners are engaging with. The goals of this project, Pate explained, align with the “50% adoption rate goal across all courses” at their institution by 2024. Pate said that at UNA, faculty can list their courses as low- or no-cost OER courses if their materials are less than $50. Curriculum mapping, according to Pate, helps them work with programs and departments to promote OER and reduce costs for students. Berry described the stages of curriculum mapping. Berry was a research assistant with Pate and McGee and is now a doctoral student at another institution. The approach Berry took was mapping courses by creating spreadsheets listing courses, professors, and other relevant information. Then, they gathered book orders from instructors and bookstore staff. Finally, they spent months tracking courses alongside their books and other texts to “crosswalk the data” from the two sets of data. Berry stressed that this isn’t a linear process: there are stages and revisiting of steps. The example presented was a spreadsheet with course descriptions and book/text information. If the cost is below $49.99, the course can be listed as part of the “Textbook Affordability Initiative.” Berry mentioned finding several “hidden OER” where the professor/instructor was already using elements of OER. Interestingly, Berry mentioned that students can make choices using the curriculum map if several sections are available for a course with varying text requirements. The team used the VIVA Course Mapping Companion Kit from the group in Virginia (with Kim G.!). Berry concluded that the process of curriculum mapping reduced complexity for analyzing student degree completion paths, the datasheets serve as templates for others, and there is increased OER visibility on campus! Also, as with yesterday’s presentation, they had a beautiful slide template from Slidesgo and Flaticon icons. I wonder if one day we could do an open database with course descriptions and texts, syllabi, and objectives for BIT courses?
