At a time when we’re ensuring our programs are future-ready – particularly in response to generative AI and evolving workplace demands – it makes strategic sense to invest in program review processes that simultaneously improve curriculum quality, student learning, and teaching efficiency. Curriculum mapping (i.e., mapping the “when” and “where” of learning across a program) serves as both a planning tool and a systematic process for identifying, monitoring, evaluating, and managing curriculum within a program. In the long run, mapping helps reduce duplication, gaps, and misalignment across a program (Harden, 2001; Liu et al., 2010), streamlines teaching preparation and assessment coordination within and across units, enables resource sharing and collaboration (Uchiyama & Radin, 2009), and makes program and unit reviews more efficient (Bath et al., 2004). In previous Teaching@Sydney articles, I explored curriculum mapping as an essential first step in ensuring that all elements of our degrees are designed at a program level to better support unit design and student learning. Here I outline how participating in and implementing curriculum mapping in your program can support teaching efficiency and program management.

The benefits of curriculum mapping for teaching efficiency and program management

Less content overlap: Mapping reveals where multiple units cover similar material, helping us determine whether this repetition is necessary or something that needs to be removed. This helps us streamline and save time in unit preparation, teaching, and assessment and marking.

Fewer repeated assessments: Mapping helps identify where assessments overlap across units (i.e., assess similar knowledge and/or skills), allowing us to determine whether this repetition is required, or if assessments can be cut or better coordinated. This helps streamline and avoid redundant assessments tasks and marking load.

Cross-unit collaboration: When the same course learning outcomes (CLOs; also known as program learning outcomes) are taught across multiple units, teachers can co-develop, share, or build on new or existing teaching materials rather than working in isolation. This reduces duplication and lightens the individual burden while ensuring curriculum coherence across the program.

Clearer boundaries of responsibility and better scaffolding of learning: Mapping helps teachers gain clarity about when and where CLOs are introduced/acquired, developed/retained, and mastered/transferred by students across a program. It allows us to see what students have already been taught in earlier units, and what is coming up in later units, reducing unnecessary reteaching or reassessing of content, and enabling more efficient and targeted teaching preparation and scaffolding.

Reflective professional development: The mapping process itself is a chance for pedagogical reflection and cross-unit dialogue and collaboration, which can strengthen teaching coherence and a sense of academic community.

Ease onboarding and teacher transitions: Curriculum maps allow new or adjunct teaching staff to quickly understand where their unit(s) fit within the program, reducing the time needed to get up to speed.

Balanced workload (for staff and students): Visualising learning across a program allows teaching teams to better balance assessment timing and workload for both students and teachers. Teaching teams can better coordinate due dates and assessment formats and optimally balance workload, reducing bunching for students and marking bottlenecks for staff.

Cohesive and progressive assessment: Curriculum maps show how and where each CLO should be assessed across units in a program. This supports cohesive and progressive assessment design, that is clear and supporting of the required learning progression.

Easier unit updates: Mapping shows exactly how each unit contributes to program outcomes, making unit revisions more straightforward. Teaching teams can more quickly identify what needs updating (i.e., less detective work) and spend less time firefighting curriculum issues each semester.

Streamlined program reviews: With curriculum alignment documented in the map, program/curriculum quality reviews and accreditation-related updates become more manageable and sustainable. Rather than spending time establishing the current state of the curriculum, teams can focus on strategic improvements, enabling more informed decision-making.

Supports continuity of curriculum quality: When staff change, the documented curriculum map ensures that curriculum coherence and quality are maintained, reducing the risk of drift or fragmentation as teaching teams evolve.

How your program can engage in curriculum mapping

First, perceptions of curriculum mapping and buy-in by your faculty, school, discipline, or program are critical (Joyner, 2016; Rahimi et al., 2010; Rawle et al., 2017). When curriculum mapping is seen as beneficial rather than burdensome, the process is more likely to be collaborative and able to produce long-term benefits to both learning and teaching (Uchiyama & Radin, 2009). Second, tools and step-by-step guidance helps to make the curriculum mapping process clear, even for quite complex programs. If you want to establish a curriculum map for your program, or if you’re planning a program design or redesign, check out this mapping guide or reach out to [email protected] for support. Alternatively, keep an eye out for upcoming workshops Course Design Institute and Proactive Design Intensive.

Conclusion

While curriculum mapping requires an upfront investment of time (i.e., participation in a workshop and/or meetings to establish a map), it creates lasting and more sustainable efficiencies in teaching and program management. By simultaneously strengthening curriculum quality, student learning, and teaching efficiency, it’s a process that can be worthwhile for both students and teachers.