C920: Essay on Curriculum Design & Development in Nursing Education
Student Name
Western Governors University
C920 Contemporary Curriculum Design and Development in Nursing Education
Prof. Name
Date
C920 – Contemporary Curriculum Design and Development in Nursing Education
Curriculum Committee
Curriculum development within nursing education requires deliberate organization, shared governance, and scholarly grounding. The Sycamore University College of Nursing case illustrates how academic institutions must periodically reassess curricular relevance to ensure alignment with contemporary healthcare demands. The guiding questions associated with this case function as an analytical framework to support decision-making related to curriculum structure, committee organization, faculty engagement, and instructional design.
Sycamore University College of Nursing Scenario
The undergraduate nursing curriculum at Sycamore University College of Nursing was developed over a three-year period and has remained largely unchanged for nearly ten years. Since its original implementation, faculty composition has shifted significantly, with only approximately one-third of current faculty having participated in the original curriculum design. Over time, increasing concerns have emerged among faculty members, administrators, and alumni regarding the curriculum’s continued reliance on a traditional medical model.
Critics argue that the existing framework insufficiently integrates community-based nursing, population health, and social determinants of health—areas now recognized as foundational to contemporary nursing practice. While consensus is not absolute, there is widespread agreement that incremental revisions would be inadequate and that a comprehensive curriculum redesign is both timely and necessary.
In response, Dr. Isabel Perkins, the academic leader of the College of Nursing, appointed Dr. Lakeisha Williams as chair of the Curriculum Committee and charged her with leading the redesign initiative. Dr. Williams was selected based on her demonstrated expertise in curriculum development, strong interpersonal and organizational skills, and thorough understanding of institutional culture. Upon convening, the Curriculum Committee agreed to function as a Steering Committee tasked with coordinating the overall process, ensuring stakeholder engagement, monitoring timelines, and maintaining transparent communication.
Early deliberations focused on whether curriculum development should be centralized within a single design team or distributed across multiple committees with specialized responsibilities. The committee also began identifying essential stakeholders and establishing a general project timeline. Dr. Williams committed to synthesizing these preliminary discussions into a structured proposal with defined milestones to be presented at an upcoming faculty meeting. These organizational decisions were viewed as critical to enabling timely and efficient initiation of curriculum development activities.
Reflection Questions and Responses
The advantages and disadvantages of the curriculum structures under consideration reveal important trade-offs. A single design team approach offers consistency, coherence, and unified philosophical direction across curriculum components. However, this structure risks overburdening a small group and may limit broad faculty participation and ownership. Conversely, a multiple-committee structure promotes shared governance, distributes workload, and incorporates diverse expertise, but it increases the risk of fragmentation and misalignment if coordination is inadequate. A hybrid model—combining centralized oversight with specialized working groups—emerges as the most balanced and effective strategy.
Several committees could effectively facilitate curriculum development, each with clearly defined roles. These committees and their responsibilities are outlined below.
| Committee Name | Primary Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Curriculum Design Committee | Establishes curricular philosophy, program outcomes, and conceptual framework |
| Course Content Committee | Develops course objectives, content outlines, and sequencing |
| Assessment and Evaluation Committee | Designs student assessment strategies and program evaluation measures |
| Faculty Development Committee | Prepares faculty through training, mentoring, and scholarly support |
Committee membership should extend beyond full-time faculty to include clinical partners, alumni, students, and community representatives to ensure curricular relevance and stakeholder investment.
Dr. Williams can promote scholarship as a central component of curriculum work by framing curriculum development as a form of scholarly inquiry. Encouraging evidence-based decision-making, supporting collaborative research on teaching and learning outcomes, and recognizing curriculum-related scholarship in promotion and tenure processes can foster faculty engagement. Embedding systematic evaluation and dissemination of outcomes further reinforces curriculum development as a legitimate academic endeavor.
Faculty development activities are essential to sustaining effective curriculum redesign. Targeted workshops on curriculum theory, instructional design, assessment strategies, educational technology, and integration of community health principles can enhance faculty readiness. Longitudinal mentoring, peer review, and interdisciplinary collaboration further support sustained engagement and competence throughout the redesign process.
Instructional Design Models and Frameworks
Model Selection and Application
Instructional design models provide structured approaches to curriculum development while accommodating the complexity of nursing education. The ADDIE model—Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—is widely used due to its clarity and systematic progression. Its emphasis on evaluation supports continuous quality improvement. Alternatively, learner-centered models such as Morrison, Ross, and Kemp allow for flexibility and iterative revision, making them well suited for dynamic educational environments where learner needs and contextual factors evolve.
Benefits of Needs Analysis in Nursing Education
A comprehensive needs analysis is foundational to effective curriculum development. It enables identification of gaps between current educational outcomes and practice expectations, ensuring alignment with clinical competencies and workforce demands. In nursing education, needs analysis also accounts for student diversity, community health priorities, and institutional resources. This process supports targeted learning outcomes, efficient resource allocation, and human performance improvement tailored to professional nursing roles.
Phases of ADDIE: Strengths and Weaknesses
The ADDIE model offers several strengths, including structured sequencing, clarity of roles, and an explicit evaluation component that informs ongoing revision. However, its linear nature can limit responsiveness if rigidly applied. In rapidly changing healthcare and educational environments, faculty may need to adapt phases concurrently to address emerging needs more effectively.
Building a Learning Activity Using the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp Model
An instructional problem was identified within the course “The Role of the BSN Nurse in Promoting Community Health,” specifically the need to enhance student competence in community engagement and health promotion. Learners represent diverse cultural, educational, and clinical backgrounds, necessitating flexible instructional strategies.
Instructional objectives include analyzing community health needs, developing culturally responsive interventions, and demonstrating effective communication with community stakeholders. Content analysis encompasses epidemiology, social determinants of health, collaborative practice, and evidence-based intervention strategies. The Morrison, Ross, and Kemp model supports alignment of objectives, learner characteristics, content, instructional strategies, and evaluation in a non-linear, adaptable manner.
Approaching Course Design and Construction
Alignment of course concepts, context, and content is achieved through curriculum mapping that links learning objectives to program outcomes and clinical practice expectations. Mapping tools allow faculty to visualize coherence and identify redundancies or gaps. When conflicts arise between course design and curriculum maps, a structured gap analysis followed by collaborative faculty dialogue supports resolution. Iterative revision and transparent communication are essential to maintaining curricular integrity.
Faculty development activities that support course creation include training in curriculum mapping, assessment design, instructional technologies, and scholarly teaching practices. Peer collaboration and mentorship further enhance quality and consistency across courses.
Developing for Distance Learning: Cardol College School of Nursing Case
Scenario Summary
Cardol College School of Nursing has a strong tradition of community-responsive education and offers a Bachelor of Science in Nursing program through both traditional and hybrid formats. As web-based technologies become more prevalent, faculty perspectives diverge regarding expanded use of distance learning. Proponents emphasize increased accessibility, alignment with institutional strategy, and preparation for technology-driven healthcare environments. Opponents express concern about diminished interpersonal interaction, challenges in role modeling, and increased faculty workload.
Dr. Grace Ingersmith, the college leader, supports strategic integration of distance learning consistent with the university’s mission to expand access while maintaining educational quality. She emphasizes that technology adoption must be pedagogically sound and adequately supported.
Reflection Questions and Responses
Faculty motivation to propose additional technology-based courses likely stems from student demand for flexibility, institutional strategic priorities, and recognition of technology’s role in modern healthcare. Innovations in pedagogy and potential efficiencies may also influence support for distance learning.
During review, the Curriculum Committee should consider the following evaluative questions.
| Key Review Questions |
|---|
| How does distance learning affect student engagement and outcomes? |
| What technological and pedagogical support is required? |
| How can interpersonal skills and professional behaviors be modeled online? |
| What are the resource and workload implications? |
| How does technology integration align with curriculum goals and community needs? |
Increasing technology-based learning offers advantages such as flexibility, expanded access, enhanced digital literacy, and innovative instructional strategies. However, disadvantages include potential reduction in face-to-face interaction, faculty resistance, increased preparation time, and inequities related to technology access.
Requiring all nursing theory courses to incorporate web-based technology is sound when implemented thoughtfully. Such integration reflects contemporary practice environments and supports diverse learning modalities. Nonetheless, safeguards must be in place to preserve relational learning, ensure accessibility, and provide adequate faculty support.
References
Obizoba, M. C. (2015). Building a learning activity in nursing education using the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp instructional design model. Nursing Education Perspectives, 36(4), 231–235.
Billings, D. M., & Halstead, J. A. (2020). Teaching in nursing: A guide for faculty (6th ed.). Elsevier.
C920: Essay on Curriculum Design & Development in Nursing Education
Iwasiw, C., Andrusyszyn, M. A., & Goldenberg, D. (2020). Curriculum development in nursing education (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.