Program Curriculum Map Template
Three documents and three sheets that code every cell by level, so the outcome with the most touchpoints and no mastery point shows up.
Free download · No account needed
A curriculum map made of checkmarks answers exactly one question: is this outcome addressed anywhere in the programme. Almost every programme passes that test, because almost every outcome gets mentioned in almost every course. The grid comes back close to full, the committee agrees it looks healthy, and nothing changes. Then a programme review asks the different question, which is whether a graduating student has demonstrated the outcome at the standard the programme publishes, and the map cannot answer it.
In this pack each mapped cell carries a level instead, from a closed set of three. Introduce means the first exposure. Reinforce means practised again in a new context, graded, with feedback. Master means performed independently against a stated criterion, and a master cell has to name the assessment behind it. That single change moves the findings out of anyone's judgement and into arithmetic, because a row with four introductions and no master cell is a fact you can count rather than an impression somebody has to defend in a meeting.
The worked programme in here is a fictional BS in Public Health at Ravensmoor State: 14 courses, 7 outcomes, 26 mapped cells of 98 possible. The finding is the outcome with the most touchpoints. Communicating health information to non-technical audiences is introduced in four separate courses and reinforced in two, and no course assesses it independently at the published standard. Six touchpoints, no mastery. On a checkmark map, that is the healthiest looking row in the programme.
What is in the pack
How the Matrix Is Coded
The mechanism doc, and the one to read first. Three levels and only three, what each one requires of a course's assessments, and the four patterns the coding exposes that a checkmark cannot. Also the concentration check: count the master cells and see how many sit in one course, because a programme whose mastery claims all live in the capstone has one point of failure.
Course to Outcome Matrix
Courses down, outcomes across, one level per cell and blanks left blank. Per-outcome totals for introduce, reinforce and master at the foot, which is what every finding reads from. The fill rate is reported too: 26 of 98 on the worked programme, and a grid much over half full usually means somebody was avoiding blanks.
Coverage Gap Register
The four tests in priority order: no mastery point anywhere, mastery in one variable-content course only, introduce straight to master, and introduced more than twice, which is redundancy rather than coverage. Every row carries a proposed fix and a named owner, and two of the four fixes on the worked programme are recoding rather than building.
Sequencing Check
Every mapped cell in outcome then term order, with the assessment named for each master cell. It catches a reinforcement standing ahead of its own introduction, a mastery point with no reinforcement stage, and a first exposure in the final term. Three exceptions in 26 cells on the worked programme, and it separates timetable fixes from curriculum fixes because they go to different people.
Mapping Narrative and Gap Note
The two documents a reviewer reads. The narrative states the intended progression, then what the map says the programme does not do, then the concentration, in that order. The gap note treats over-introduction and under-delivery as one finding, because an outcome introduced four times and mastered never is both at once.
The rule that keeps the map honest
A space rule the assistant is held to as well: never upgrade a cell to close a gap. A master cell is a claim that a named assessment measures the outcome against a stated criterion. A recoded cell with nothing behind it puts every other cell in the map in question, which costs a programme far more than the original finding did.
How it works
- 1
Send the syllabi and the published outcomes
Every course in the programme, including the ones taught by other departments, plus the programme outcomes in the exact words they are published in, any map you already have, and the normal term sequence.
- 2
Check the outcomes can be coded at all
An outcome saying a graduate will appreciate the importance of something cannot be evidenced, so no cell can honestly be coded master against it. Those get named and rewritten first, which is where the learning outcome writing pack does the work.
- 3
Code the grid from the assessments
The level a course supports lives in what its assessments require, not in its description. First definition of a term is introduce; a graded task assuming prior knowledge is reinforce; an independent performance against a stated criterion is master. Ambiguous syllabi get coded low and flagged for the course lead.
- 4
Run the four gap tests and the sequence check
Counts per outcome produce the findings, each with a fix and an owner. Then the sequence check against the published term order, which is also where the workload planner matters, since a fix that adds a reinforcement point adds marking somewhere.
Frequently asked questions
Is this template free?
Yes. Download the three documents and three sheets as Word and CSV files with nothing to sign up for. Opening it as a working space, where the level counts and the gap tests recompute as you code cells, needs an account. The rest sit in the template library.
What format are the downloaded files?
Three Word documents and three CSV sheets in one zip. The sheets open in Excel, Numbers or Google Sheets, and they arrive carrying the worked public health programme so the column relationships and the per-level totals are visible before you replace the data.
Why three levels and not five?
Because a fourth level gets used to avoid a decision. Introduce, reinforce and master each name a different thing an assessment does, and every extra level in practice becomes a place to put a cell somebody did not want to code. A course spanning two levels in one term is coded at the higher one.
Our accreditor asks for a curriculum map. Does this satisfy that?
It produces the map and the findings, which is the part reviewers read. Recognised agencies have to set expectations for student achievement and curricula under federal regulation, so check your own agency's format. The accreditation self-study pack handles the surrounding document.
What if a cell should be master but no assessment measures it?
Then it is not master. Code it reinforce and record the gap with a proposed fix. The rule is enforced in the space and the assistant follows it too, because a cell upgraded to clear a finding puts every other cell in the map in question and costs more than the finding did.
Is a sparse map a bad map?
Usually the opposite. Twenty-six mapped cells of 98 is what a map looks like when blanks were allowed to stay blank. A grid where nearly every cell carries a level is normally a grid where nobody was willing to say a course does not carry an outcome, and it cannot produce a finding.
Where does the course-level work happen?
This is the programme-level view, and it sits above the course. Individual course alignment between outcomes, activities and graded work lives in the course design pack, and the attainment evidence that a mastery cell actually rests on is collected assessment by assessment in the outcome assessment evidence pack.
Find the outcome you teach everywhere and assess nowhere
Send the syllabi and your published programme outcomes. The first pass says which outcomes can be coded at all, then the level counts produce the findings without anybody having to argue for them.
Map a real programme