Umeå University's logo

The concept of Curriculum Agility has been co-created in a series of sessions at CDIO meetings and conferences since 2018. Deliverables were a jointly generated definition, characteristics, a set of principles, and a self-mapping process on these principles. Using the Curriculum Agility concept offers guidance for CDIO programs and institutions in increasing the adaptability of their curricula based on the latest insights and developments in their discipline, continuously fulfilling the need of an ever more diverse student population and anticipating sudden societal changes. Curriculum Agility takes a holistic approach to considering conditions for proactive and timely curriculum development, including but not limited to enhancement of faculty competence. Although the success of CDIO implementation depends on this wider set of conditions that can drive, enable, or hinder change, this is currently not addressed in the CDIO standards. This paper proposes Curriculum Agility as an optional standard in the CDIO framework. It is a widely applicable, program-level concept including both educational and organisational aspects that addresses an important need in engineering education, and it is co-created within the CDIO community. Curriculum Agility is currently not sufficiently present or addressed in the existing standards. Therefore, this paper argues that Curriculum Agility as an optional standard and rubric will be a new useful tool in the CDIO toolbox.

This special session, within the conference theme of Incorporating Convergence into Programs, Curricula, and Continuing Education, focuses on Curriculum Agility in engineering education. It will introduce the concept of Curriculum Agility and its current trends, as well as further co-develop the concept behind it. This is done following an iterative design thinking approach, by co-creating guiding principles that engineering institutions can use to make their study programs more responsive, dynamic, and flexible. Curriculum Agility is particularly important in engineering education in order to keep pace with the rapid development of new technologies and materials. In addition, the concept aims to meet students' expectations and needs for more individualized study plans, as well as society's need for forward-thinking engineers equipped to contribute to finding solutions to current and future societal challenges. Thus, to anticipate and meet these challenges, institutions for engineering education need to have an organizational and management structure with the capacity to act within a much shorter timeframe than traditionally seen in universities. Curriculum Agility is a framework for introducing necessary changes in operations to be able to act responsibly and rapidly on change and expectations. This work presents seven principles for Curriculum Agility that have emerged from a series of sessions at international conferences and network meetings. The seven principles currently include: Stakeholder Involvement, Organization and Governance, Decision Making, Program and Course Design, Innovation of Education, and Pedagogy and Didactics. This special session brings educators together to discuss the 'what, how and why' with regard to Curriculum Agility. The overall aim is to further develop a shared vision on Curriculum Agility and build upon the intention of assessing it at different levels in the organization of engineering education institutions. The expected outcome of the special session is a collection of refined, redefined, and perhaps even newly defined principles for Curriculum Agility.

This short paper describes the first prototyping of a self-evaluation process of Curriculum Agility at a Faculty of Technology in Sweden. The process comprises guided, semi-structured, individual interviews at different organisational levels within the faculty, a joint narrative based on those interviews, prioritizing development strategies per level, and jointly mapping them on importance and implementation time. The self-evaluation is part of and based on the research on the principles of Curriculum Agility. The results show the interplay in timely curriculum change for futureproof engineering education between the teaching staff, the systems and the people who control the systems. The self-evaluation brings together the different perspectives and perceptions within the faculty and gives insight in how those affect the willingness towards and occurrence of curriculum development. This work in progress indicates how doing such a qualitative self-evaluation paves the road for transparent strategic dialogues on a holistic level about what to give attention and organize differently.