Within six institutions, Chalmer’s University of Technology, Delft University of Technology, Eindhoven University of Technology, NTNU, Queen’s University Belfast, and Umeå University, activities of self-mapping Curriculum Agility have taken place, facilitated by the co-creators of this work. In this paper, they reflect on enablers of Curriculum Agility that they identified during the self-mapping process at their respective institutions. By putting a spotlight on enablers, ways to overcome obstacles are exemplified, when the ambition is to proactively futureproof an engineering curriculum. These enablers help in four curriculum innovation areas, which each have their own challenges: (1) Continuously adjusting learning content in courses, creating a need for a teaching and learning system with more dynamic learning goals and on-the-go, reciprocal expertise development. (2) Implementing or refining flexible education pedagogy and didactics to tailor to and being inclusive of the diverse student populations entering university. (3) Working with a responsive organisation and a continuously-change-facilitating management, where engagement and ownership of educational innovation is shared, and innovation space is constructively created where desired and needed. (4) Continuously developing all academic staff involved in engineering education innovation, for informed decision-making and shared understanding of the pedagogic and (inter- and trans-) disciplinary innovations needed to keep the engineering programme relevant and of high quality. This paper highlights positive examples of Curriculum Agility, and how its characteristics and principles can be implemented in a variety of university contexts with different organisational structures.
EXAMPLES OF ENABLERS FOR CURRICULUM AGILITY
Reference Text
Proceedings of the 21st International CDIO Conference, hosted by Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, June 2-5, 2025 Year
2025 Authors
Affiliations
Umeå University, Sweden, Leiden University, The Netherlands, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, KTH Royal Institute of Technology,Sweden, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway, Queen’s University Belfast, TU Delft, 4TU.CEE
Pages
603-614 Abstract
Keywords
Curriculum Agility, Transformative Curriculum Change, Futureproof Engineering Education, Change Management, CDIO Standard 1, CDIO Standard 2, CDIO Standard 3, CDIO Syllabus 4, CDIO Standard 5, CDIO Standard 6, CDIO Standard 7, CDIO Standard 8, CDIO Standard 9, CDIO Standard 10, CDIO Standard 11, CDIO Standard 12, CDIO optional standard 1, CDIO optional standard 2, CDIO optional standard 3, CDIO optional standard 4
Document