University-wide curriculum reform: two processes to aid in decision making

Abstract

Reform of engineering education can take a variety of forms. At Kettering University, a primarily undergraduate engineering institution, the Faculty Senate decided that the curriculum structure needed to be critically evaluated and possibly reformed. The Senate appointed a task force to coordinate the evaluation of the existing curriculum structure and the consideration of a variety of alternatives. The task force used systematic processes for decision making which were also helpful in identifying reasons for change and developing faculty buy-in for curriculum reform. The paper describes the reasons why these processes were needed, the circumstances under which they were applied, how the processes work, and how the results were used. The first formal decision-making process is a modified version of the widely-accepted SWOT exercise. The technique involved identifying strengths and weaknesses of various curriculum structures. It was used in large group settings to which all faculty and administrators were invited. A principle advantage of this approach is that all opinions were heard and equally weighted. In a second formal decision-making process, a weighted criteria matrix was constructed to systematically evaluate the alternative curriculum structures. The matrix was developed via a series of brainstorming sessions by the task force. The task force used their personal opinions, data from the strength-weakness exercises, and the expertise of university administrators in ranking the attributes of each alternative. This process allowed the task force to identify positive attributes of a proposed curriculum structure and to develop a hybrid structure featuring the best characteristics of each alternative.