Inconsistency evaluation of the curriculum logical structure

Purpose of the study. The main purpose of creating a curriculum is to regulate academic disciplines in accordance with the logic of the learning process, defined by the relationship between the basic concepts of the disciplines. Violation of this logic becomes apparent only directly during the training sessions.
A large variety of quantitative methods uses indicators that do not reveal structural deficiencies in the curriculum. This makes it difficult to improve the curriculum.
The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the application of a general approach to the assessment of the structural inconsistency of systems in relation to the evaluation of the logical structure of the curriculum.
Materials and methods. The paper applies a general approach to the assessment of structural integrity, developed on the basis of the provisions of the general theory of systems and graph theory. The approach involves the construction of three interrelated structural models of the system and using them to determine the initial data for calculating the index of inconsistency of the system structure.
Results. The overall approach to the assessment of structural integrity is adapted to assess the logical structure of the curriculum. Three models of curriculum structure are developed:
Elementary model of interdisciplinary communication;
Curriculum network model;
Hierarchical curriculum model.
Based on the parameters of the hierarchical curriculum model, using three adapted algorithms, the value of the inconsistency index of the curriculum structure in the direction of preparation “Applied Informatics” is calculated. Recommendations on changing the structure of the studied curriculum to reduce the degree of its structural inconsistency are proposed. 
Conclusion. As a result of the research, the methods were proposed that allow identifying possible contradictions in the structure of the curriculum and evaluating its inconsistency. 

As the experiments have shown, it is extremely difficult to study the curricula in a manual manner, the number of disciplines in which exceeds 50. In this regard, the development of a complex of computer programs that will automate the assessment of the inconsistency of large curricula is being completed.

1. The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999.

2. Gogoleva I.V., Semenova G.E., Ivanova A.V. Pedagogical conditions of interdisciplinary integration in the implementation of the competence approach. Pedagogicheskiy zhurnal = Pedagogical Journal. 2017; 3A (7): 90–97. (In Russ.)

3. Leclair Laurie W., Dawson M., Howe A. et al. A longitudinal interprofessional simulation curriculum for critical care teams: Exploring successes and challenges. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2018;32 (3): 386–390.

4. Castillo-Parra S., Oyarzo Torres S., Espinoza Barrios M. et al. The implementation of multiple interprofessional integrated modules by health sciences faculty in Chile. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017; 31. (6): 777–780.

5. Noble D.B., Mochrie S.G.J., O’Hern C.S., Pollard T.D., Regan L. Promoting convergence: The integrated graduate program in physical and engineering biology at Yale University, a new model for graduate education. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 2016; 44 (6): 537–549.

6. Barry A., Born G., Weszkalnys G. Logics of interdisciplinarity. Economy and Society. 2008; 37: 20–49.

7. Wickson F, Carew AL, Russel AW. Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality. Futures. 2006; 38: 1046–1059.

8. Holm P., Goodsite M.E., Cloetingh S et al. Collaboration between the natural, social and human sciences in global change research. Environmental Science and Policy. 2013; 28: 25–35.

9. Jahn T., Bergmann M., Keil F. Transdisciplinarity between mainstreaming and marginalization. Ecological Economics. 2012; 79: 1–10.

10. Lyall C., Bruce A., Marsden W., Meagher L. Identifying Key Success Factors in the Quest for Interdisciplinarity Knowledge. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh; 2011. 49 p.

11. Lyall C., Fletcher I. Experiments in interdisciplinary capacity-building: the successes and challenges of large-scale interdisciplinary investments. Science and Public Policy. 2013; 40: 1–7.

12. Rivera-Ferre M.G., Pereira L., Karpouzoglou T. et al. A vision for trans-disciplinarity in Future Earth: perspectives from young scientists. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development. 2013. DOI:10.5304/jafscd.2013.034.028.

13. Bammer G. Disciplining Interdisciplinarity: Integration and Implementation Sciences for Researching Complex Real-World Problems. Canberra: ANU E Press; 2013. DOI: 10.22459/DI.01.2013.

14. Watson G. Curricular Review Evaluation Methods; 2013. Available from: https://www.uoguelph.ca/vpacademic/avpa/outcomes/pdfs/Curricular%20Review%20Evaluation%20Methods.pdf.

15. Moreira-Mora T., Espinoza-Guzman J. Initial evidence to validate an instructional design-derived evaluation scale in higher education programs. International Journal of Education Technology in Higher Education. 2016; 13. UNSP 11.

16. Rezvani R., Haghshenas B. Evaluation of curricular alignment in standard-based higher education: a case study of Iranian university TEFL courses. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods. 2017; 7 (5): 108–132.

17. Lizandra J., Suarez-Guerrero C. Peer-working in the digital curation of curricular contents. Revista Latinoamericana de Tecnología Educativa. 2017; 16 (2): 177–191.

18. Castillo-Parra S., Oyarzo Torres S., Espinoza Barrios M. et al. The implementation of multiple interprofessional integrated modules by health sciences faculty in Chile. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2017; 31 (6): 777–780.

19. Lim-Dunham J.E., Ensminger D.C., McNulty J.A. et al. A Vertically Integrated Online Radiology Curriculum Developed as a Cognitive Apprenticeship: Impact on Student Performance and Learning. Academic Radiology. 2016; 23 (2): 252–261.

20. Meyer J.H.F., Knight D.B., Callaghan D.P. et al. An empirical exploration of metacognitive assessment activities in a third-year civil engineering hydraulics course. European Journal of Engineering Education. 2015; 40 (3): 309–327.

21. Pavlovskiy I.S. Using concepts of scientific activity for semantic integration of publications. Procedia Computer Science. 2017; 103: 370–377.

22. Pavlovskiy I.S. The semantic models of large terminological texts. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference «Management of Large-Scale System Development» (MLSD); 2017. DOI:10.1109/MLSD.2017.8109667.